Floor Statements

Offered By: Mr. Burton of Indiana

Amendment No. 26: Page 38, line 13, after the dollar

amount, insert ``(reduced by $97,400,000)''.

Offered By: Mr. Burton

Amendment No. 65: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Mr. Burton of Indiana

Amendment No. 71: At the end of the bill, before the short

title, insert the following:

Offered by Mr. Burton of Indiana

Amendment No. 72: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Mr. Speaker, first of all, let me congratulate our chairman on crafting a bill that, in large part, is very good. It increases aid to Pakistan by triple in some areas, and I think it's very positive. It deals with economic and humanitarian assistance that will help Pakistan build schools, roads and hospitals, and it will help Pakistan's economic infrastructure. All of that is good. I know that the President and the administration support that as well.

But unfortunately--here comes the ``but'' part--unfortunately, the chairman and our Democrat colleagues decided to load this bill up with ill-conceived provisions to micromanage U.S. security assistance to Pakistan, as the ranking member just said. This is not just my opinion. The Secretary of Defense, Mr. Gates, and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Mr. Mullen, wrote the Armed Services Committee last month. Here is what they said:

``The degree of conditionality and limitations on security assistance to Pakistan'' in H.R. 1886 ``severely constrains the flexibility necessary for the executive branch and the Department of Defense given the fluid and dynamic environment that exists in Pakistan.''

I will in a minute. Do you remember last night when I asked you to yield? But that's okay. I will yield to you in a minute just to show you what kind of a guy I am.

Anyhow, this is a very difficult time over there. I would like to say to my chairman, if he could see this--Mr. Chairman, I hope that you can see this. It's very important that we look at the situation on the ground in Pakistan right now.

The green area is the area that the government controls. The brown area is the area that the Taliban controls. The tan area is where there is a strong Taliban presence. The yellow is where there are federally supported tribal areas. Of course, up here in the north is the blue North-West Frontier Province.

If we lose this, if we lose this here, you've got a heck of a problem in Afghanistan. That's the entire border with Afghanistan. If you lose that, then the President's goal to stabilize and to win the war in Afghanistan is going to go right down the tubes, and this micromanaging that you're doing in this bill is not going to be helpful.

Now, in the past, I have not agreed with Senator Kerry. In fact, I can't remember ever agreeing with Senator Kerry. But just to let you know that there is some bipartisan opposition, I want to read to you what he said. Senate Foreign Relations Chairman John

Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, the author of similar Senate legislation, Senate bill 962, said, it's ``overly restrictive'' and ``counterproductive.''

``It sends a message in the Pakistani body politic that the people of Pakistan say, `Well . . . we're just doing their (U.S.) bidding, we're their lackeys, we're not in control.' ''

I think that's counter to the kind of message that we want to send to Pakistan right now.

This is a very difficult time. This is not just a debate between the chairman and the ranking member and me. This is war and peace. It's the survivability of Pakistan as an independent country. It's winning or losing the war in Afghanistan. And we have to remember that Pakistan is a nuclear power. If the Taliban is successful in this area, not only will Afghanistan go down the tubes, but in likelihood, they will have control of some nuclear weapons. I know we've got precautions that are being taken to stop that. But in the event this takes place and we lose control of those nuclear weapons, we've got a real possible conflagration for the whole area in that part of the world.

So I would like to say to the chairman, and I hope in conference committee this is changed, that this micromanaging that you're doing to try the tell the Pakistani Government how to conduct its military operations in Pakistan, that that is limited or stopped.

I will be happy to yield.

Let me just say to my colleague that there is an unnecessary limitation relating to Pakistan's F-16 program that could be dealt with by nonlegislative means, which you're dealing with that in this bill. It shows that there is no trust: a limitation on State Department-funded assistance unless Pakistan meets certain conditions relating to nonproliferation, counterterrorism, and other issues.

I don't understand you.

All I can say, if you read the bill and you listen to the debate and listen to even what Senator Kerry says, with whom I don't agree with very much, you see that there is too much micromanaging in this bill.

This is a war over there, and we should be supporting our ally in every way possible so the Taliban isn't victorious.

Mr. Speaker, in the past couple of weeks, two of our colleagues, Frank Wolf of Virginia, a Republican, and Jim Cooper of Tennessee, a Democrat, sent this booklet around to all of the Members. We get a lot of correspondence and a lot of books and leaflets; but I would just like to say to my colleagues tonight, I hope you read this. It doesn't take very long, but it's extremely important because it deals with not only today but with our future and our kids' future and our posterity. What it talks about is the debt that we have in this country and where we're going.

In the last 10 years, we've gone from $5.5 trillion in debt to over $11 trillion in debt, and the debt is escalating at a very rapid rate. In fact, right now the projected deficit in the future is up to $56 trillion. The reason for expected expenditures is for the programs that have been proposed and have been passed into law by this body and the other body. Right now explicit liabilities include publicly held debt, military and civilian pensions, and retiree health benefits, plus other things, that's $12.2 trillion; $1.3 trillion is for Federal insurance loan guarantees, leases and so forth; and then the big one, $42.9 trillion, is Medicare hospital insurance, which is $12.7 trillion; Medicare outpatient, $15.7 trillion; Medicare prescription drugs, $7.9 trillion; and Social Security, $6.6 trillion, for a total of $56.4 trillion. And that does not include what's going on today. We're going into debt right now at about $1 to $2 trillion a year, and it's going to continue like that because of the programs we're talking about.

Over the past few months since this new administration has taken office, we have seen proposed a socialized medicine approach to health, a national health care program. Lord only knows how much that's going to cost, but it's going to be in the billions and billions and probably the trillions of dollars. Much of that will be added to the national debt because we don't have that money. The auto industry--there's been bailouts of the auto industry, and it hasn't really worked. They still had to file chapter 11, and over $50 billion went to the auto industry.

The banking and financial institutions. There was a big bailout of those in the TARP bill, I believe it was. And then the energy bill that they're talking about, the cap-and-trade, is going to cost a tremendous amount of money to the taxpayers not only from the tax money we get here, but also what they are going to have to spend in their homes for higher electric bills and everything else in the future.

Let me just say, Mr. Speaker, this is something my colleagues really ought to read. It talks about our future, our kids' futures and our grandkids' futures. If we continue down the path we're on, there's no doubt in my mind that this country will go bankrupt, and we'll go the way of great civilizations that we have seen in the past, like Rome. There's just no question about it in my mind. Right now the debt that's held by China, Japan, England and other countries is out of sight. They don't want to buy our debt anymore because the value of the dollar has been plummeting because we're printing so much money. Right now we're talking about printing trillions of dollars more because they won't buy our debt, and we don't have that money. When that printing press gets out of control like it is right now, down the road we're going to see very high inflation, very high taxes and an economy that's unsustainable.

So I hope my colleagues will read this. The book is called State of the Union's Finances: A Citizen's Guide, put out by my good friends Frank Wolf and Jim Cooper, and it is from the Pete Peterson Foundation. It's on your desk. I hope all of you will read it.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the 2009 recipients of the coveted Ellis Island Medal of Honor. Presented annually by the National Ethnic Coalition (NECO), the Ellis Island Medal of Honor pays tribute to our Nation's immigrant heritage, as well as individual achievement. The medals are awarded to U.S. citizens from various ethnic backgrounds who exemplify outstanding qualities in both their personal and professional lives, while continuing to preserve the richness of their particular heritage. Since NECO's founding in 1986, more than 2,000 American citizens have received Ellis Island Medals of Honor, including six American Presidents, several United States Senators, Congressmen, Nobel Laureates, outstanding athletes, artists, clergy, and military leaders.

As we all know, citizens of the United States can trace their ancestry to many nations. The richness and diversity of American life makes us unique among the Nations of the world and is in many ways the key to why America is the most innovative country in the world. The Ellis Island Medals of Honor not only celebrate select individuals but also the pluralism and democracy that enabled our ancestors to celebrate their cultural identities while still embracing the American way of life. This medal is not about money, but about people who really seized the opportunities this great country has to offer and who used those opportunities to not only better their own lives but make a difference in the lives of those around them. By honoring these outstanding individuals, we honor all who share their origins and we acknowledge the contributions they and other groups have made to America. I commend NECO and its Board of Directors headed by my good friend, Nasser J. Kazeminy, for honoring these truly outstanding individuals for their tireless efforts to foster dialogue and build bridges between different ethnic groups, as well as promote unity and a sense of common purpose in our Nation.

Madam Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to join me in recognizing the good works of NECO, and congratulating all of the 2009 recipients of the Ellis Island Medals of Honor. I also ask unanimous consent that the names of this year's recipients be placed into the Congressional Record following my statement.

Gen. John P. Abizaid, USA (Ret), Hon. Eduardo Aguirre, Imam Shamsi Ali, Dr. Kaveh Alizadeh, Robert V. Allegrini, Hon. Victor G. Atiyeh, Archbishop Vicken N. Aykazian, Sir Julian Bachynsky, Ralph M. Bahna, George S. Barrett, Edward J. Bergman, Hamid Biglari, Carolyn A. Blashek, Paul F. Boulos, PhD, Lt.Gen. Ted F. BowIds, USAF, CAPT Patrick C. Burns, USN, Dr. Samia E. Burton, Otto B. Candies, John J. Casey, Ali Cayir, Sant Singh Chatwal, Dr. Walter. R. Chitwood, Jr., Joseph Ilhawn Cho, Edward T. Cloonan, Duane E. Collins, David F. D'Alessandro, Shiv C. Dass, Kiran R. Desai, Robert D. Donno, Rayna Dubose, Emilio Estefan, Jr., Charles Fazzino, Sean T. Flanagan, John S. Gonsalves, James B. Hayes, CAPT Gregory P. Hitchen, USCG, W. Andrew Hodge, MD, Forough B. Hosseini, Susan Pien Hsu, PhD, Taffy A. Jowdy, James M. Kalustian, Rabbi Alvin Kass, Fred Kavli, Lisa Kazor, Kevin A. Kistler, Carol N. Lambos, Esq., BG James B. Laster, USMC, Leon Y. Lee, Oh Young Lee, Sandra Lee, Francine A. LeFrak, Nooshin Malakzad, Bishop Gregory J. Mansour, George D. Martin, Hon. Grace Meng, Thomas L. Mills, Esq., Joseph H. Moglia, Dr. Reza Momeni, Dr. Uma Mysorekar, Tavit 0. Najarian, ScD, John F. Nickoll, Michael K. O'Malley, Rev. Timothy O'Neill, George Pagoumian, Young J. Paik, Hon. Mary Mitzi Purdue, Moises Perez-Martinez, Natale A. Picco, Jr. John Podesta, Linda Ann Pope, William A. Pope, David M. Puckett, Phil T. Pulaski, Hon. Bijan Rafiekian, Maj. Dan Rooney, USAF, Gaetano G. Scavone, Salman T. Sesi, Esq., Dr. Jatin P. Shah, Liu Tee Shuh, Brian J. Smith, Col. Stephen Smith, USA, Steven N. Stein, Carol K. Strauss, Chester A. Szarejko, Oscar S. Tatosian, Joseph J. Thoams, DDS, William H. Tilley, Lenny Tilman, Lana Todorovich, Chiling Tong, Pauline A. Turley, Anthony M. Valletta, Kathleen Waldron, PhD, Kevin M. Wall, The Venerable Lama Pema Wangdak, Jeffrey N. Watanabe, Esq., Gary E. Weksler, Sally Tsui Wong- Avery

I thank my colleague for yielding.

I had three amendments that were brought before the Rules Committee yesterday, and for the life of me, I can't figure out why the Rules Committee didn't make these amendments in order. Let me just talk to you about these three amendments. Then I'd like for the Rules Committee to comment on them, if they would.

First of all, there is a man named Benon Sevan, who has been indicted in the Oil-for-Food scandal with Saddam Hussein. Saddam Hussein was kicking millions of dollars to this guy in the Oil-for-Food scandal. This guy has been indicted. He is hiding in Cyprus right now, and the U.N., with our money, is going to pay his legal bills, and they're almost $1 million already.

Why should the American taxpayer be paying the legal bills of Mr. Sevan, who was involved in the Oil-for-Food scandal that we all know about? Why should the United States taxpayer be paying his legal fees, especially when he is hiding out in Cyprus?

Well, that was one of the amendments, and I hope you'll explain to me why the American taxpayer should be paying for that.

The second amendment deals with liquidated assets that we give to enterprise organizations around the world. We give hundreds of millions of dollars to organizations around the world to help the economies of various countries. When those enterprise funds and organizations are liquidated, they take that money, and they put it into foundations or into other organizations within those countries. Right now, there is $900 million that is sitting out there of American taxpayer money that is going to foundations in other countries, and we don't believe all of that money should go there, because it is not for its intended purpose. So, if they want to do that, we think we should get at least half of our money back, which would be $450 million.

For the life of me, I can't figure out why the Rules Committee wouldn't want to get at least half of our money back that's not being used for its intended purpose. It makes no sense to me, so I hope they'll explain that to me.

Lastly, Jerusalem in Israel is our best ally in the Middle East. Since the 1967 war, Israel has maintained that united Jerusalem is the indivisible, eternal capital of Israel. On November 14 of 2005, Congress mandated that the embassy be moved to Jerusalem. We mandated that our embassy be moved from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in 2005, but we did give the President waiver authority under certain circumstances. Every single year, there has been a waiver granted that does not allow our embassy to be moved to Jerusalem.

I think that's wrong. It's time to change that. My amendment would have said that we move our embassy and that we start building the embassy in Jerusalem now just as it was proposed and passed by this Congress in 2005.

So I would like for my Democrat colleagues on the Rules Committee to explain to me why these three amendments were not made in order: one dealing with something we've already done, which was to order our embassy in Israel to be moved to Jerusalem. We've already ordered that.

I hope you will explain.

I want to thank the ranking member on her opening statement.

My goodness, I think you covered just about everything and you did it very well. And I want to compliment your staff for working so hard on that statement.

I'm perplexed on this bill because there is some language in there that I like. For instance, the commitment to Israel, giving them support for their missile defense system, I think that's a positive. But there are so many negatives in this bill that it's going to make it very difficult for those who would like to support it to not be able to. Let me just give you a couple of examples, and the ranking member just mentioned that.

North Korea should be called a terrorist state. They're launching missiles and threatening the security of the entire region as well as giving nuclear technology to other countries. In addition to that, there's money in here, our tax dollars, that are going to defend Mr. Sevan, who is hiding out in Cyprus right now because he's been indicted and the U.N., using our tax dollars, is going to pay for his defense, which is almost $1 million. We shouldn't be using taxpayer dollars for that, and we ought to let the U.N. know it.

In addition to that, the bill is increasing spending by 12 percent to $41 billion over a 2-year period. There's a pay raise in there, and I understand these people work very hard, but we are having difficult times here at home. People in this country are suffering, and they want to give a 23 percent increase in pay to overseas Foreign Service officers. I just don't get that. Maybe a pay raise of some size should be realized, but 23 percent when this country is really suffering economically makes no sense.

It also creates an Office for Global Women's Issues. And it's highly likely that this office will include, in its mission, the advancement of abortion advocacy abroad. And I don't think this body ought to be doing that, especially those who believe so strongly in the right-to- life provisions that we have supported in the past.

I thank the gentlewoman for yielding.

And then, of course, it has a sexual orientation amount of language in it which would require the tracking of discrimination related to sexual orientation for actual or perceived sexual orientation and gender identity violations. And then, finally, it increases the U.N. spending by so much and the contributions we would have to give by 32 percent over the 2009 levels.

This is not a good part of the bill. We would like to support the bill, but unfortunately, there is too much junk in it, Mr. Chairman. I wish we didn't have to say ``no'' to this.

Mr. Speaker, I have a motion to recommit at the desk.

I am, in its present form.

Mr. Speaker, the Iranian regime is one of the most prolific state sponsors of terror in the world. Iran has defied the United States, the U.N. Security Council and the IAEA, and it continues its quest for nuclear technology. A nuclear Iran would pose a grave danger to American citizens at home as well as to our service men and women and to our United States citizens abroad.

Focusing on Iran should be a top priority of the United States Congress. Every minute we wait to address this issue the world becomes a more dangerous place. The State Department has not had an authorization bill since fiscal year 2003, and it has continued to operate. While the authorization is important, stopping Iran from attaining a nuclear weapon is far more important.

The Republican motion to recommit would replace the authorization bill with the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions bill that Mr. Berman introduced earlier this year along with Ileana Ros-Lehtinen. This bill would impose badly needed sanctions on Iran. We feel that this bill is the right way to proceed and should be acted on immediately. The legislation currently has 155 cosponsors with wide bipartisan support.

This legislation would mandate the State Department to open immediate investigations into alleged violations of the Iran Sanctions Act. This legislation would implement sanctions on companies that do business in Iran. This legislation implements sanctions on those who supply refined fuels to Iran. This legislation expands sanctions on Iranian exported petroleum and petroleum byproducts as well as on those who helped facilitate their export.

Iran can only finance its threatening activities against us and the world because of the foreign investment in its energy sector. Depriving the regime of refined petroleum and of foreign investment will severely undermine Iran's economy, and it will increase pressure on the mullahs to abandon their dangerous course.

We need to impose serious sanctions on Iran, and we need to do it now without delay. We've been delaying long enough. The bill has been introduced for some time. I've talked to the chairman of the committee about it, and there is no reason not to move on it today.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

I will.

Will the gentleman yield?

Will the gentleman yield?

Well, if my chairman would yield for just one question.

The gentleman won't yield for one question?

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, Members of Congress in the House and the Senate get literature sent to them every single day. In fact, we probably get four or five books a week. I don't know how many little leaflets and pamphlets we're asked to read, but we don't have time to read them all. We ask our staff to read some of them, but we don't have a chance to really get into the minutiae of some of these brochures.

Our colleagues in both the House and the Senate got this little booklet called ``The State of the Union's Finances, a Citizen's Guide.'' These are going to be given, I guess, to people all across this country. I hope every one of my colleagues and everybody in America gets a chance to read this little booklet. Now, this was sent to us by our colleagues Frank Wolf, Republican of Virginia, and Jim Cooper, Democrat of Tennessee. I just want to read to you a little bit about the situation that America faces, because Americans right now, I don't think, are really aware of the fiscal problems we're facing.

As of the fall of 2008, we had $12.2 trillion in explicit liabilities. That's publicly held debt, military and civilian pensions, retiree health benefits, and others things related to that. We had $1.3 trillion in debt for Federal insurance, loan guaranties, leases, and so forth, and we had a $42.9 trillion debt from Medicare hospital insurance, Medicare outpatient services, Medicare prescription drugs, and Social Security. That's a total of $56.4 trillion in debt that we have right now, today. That amounts to $184,000 of debt for every man, woman, and child in this country; it amounts to $435,000 of debt for a full-time worker; for each household, it amounts to $483,000 in debt. That's the national debt today.

George Washington said we should avoid ungenerously throwing upon posterity, our kids, the burden we, ourselves, ought to bear. In 1796, they had a deficit, and George Washington said that we can't allow this to happen because we don't want to leave a burden to our kids and to our grandkids by spending too much money.

I'm telling you right now, colleagues and anybody else who is paying attention, what we're going to leave our kids and our grandkids is something that they will curse us for because they're going to have to pay extremely high taxes, and the inflationary problems that they're going to face are going to be insurmountable.

I can't believe that we're doing this right now. We're talking about a national health care program that's going to add additional trillions of dollars. We're talking about bailouts to the financial institutions and to the auto industry. We're talking about a cap-and-trade program that's going to increase the cost of every family in America between $3,000 and $4,000 to turn on their lights or to buy gasoline at a service station or anything else that produces energy. We're adding about $2 trillion a year to this debt, and it's unsustainable. It is going to affect every man, woman, and child who is living in America today, but what it's going to do to future generations is unbelievable.

We can destroy this Republic if we don't get control of spending. This is a political hyperbole. I'm telling you right now that we can destroy this form of government and this civilization we have, just like Rome did, if we don't get control of spending. It is out of control. It is out of control. We're $56 trillion in debt today, and we're adding $2 trillion a year, plus all of these additional programs we're coming up with. In the next 5 years, they say we're going to spend an additional $5 trillion. We don't have it, so we're putting this burden on our kids and on our grandkids.

It's wrong. We have to do something about it. We have to do it now. We have to start getting our spending in order. My Republican and Democrat colleagues understand that. Mr. Wolf is a Republican who sent this out, and Mr. Cooper is a Democrat. They understand it. We all ought to understand it.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the students of Hamilton Southeastern High School for receiving Honorable Mention at the annual ``We the People'' Contest recently held here in Washington, D.C. The ``We the People'' contest is a grueling 3- day-long event where teams of students from every State of the Union and several U.S. Territories compete in a series of simulated congressional hearings to apply constitutional principles and historical facts to

contemporary situations. The event culminates with the Top Ten teams conducting their mock hearings right here on Capitol Hill in either a Senate or House hearing room.

I am proud to say that Indiana teams have made the Top Ten almost every year the competition has been held; and this year will mark Hamilton Southeastern High School's second trip to the Top Ten. I ask all my colleagues to join me in recognizing the outstanding Hoosiers of Hamilton Southeastern High School, students and staff, for their hard work and dedication to academic excellence. And I ask my colleagues to join with me to congratulate the Hamilton Southeastern High School Team--Teacher Jill Baisinger, and students, Kellie Devore-Gogola; Adam Gauthier; Alex Gillham; Caitlin Graovac; John Holt; Alana Kane; Matthew Knafel; Jaclyn Lauer; Matthew Lymbcropoulos; Mark Mace; Samuel Morgan; Eric Ogle; Jonathan Sorg; Julia Strzeskowski; and Mitchell West--for their outstanding performance at the 2009 ``We the People'' contest. I look forward to next year's competition when I'm sure that Hamilton Southeastern High School will not only be back in the Top Ten but win it all.

Mr. Speaker, it was reported today in the New York Times that the Federal Government mistakenly made public a 266- page report marked ``highly confidential,'' and it gives detailed information about hundreds of the Nation's civilian nuclear sites and programs, including maps that show the precise locations of stockpiles of fuel for nuclear weapons.

Can you believe that? A confidential document that is supposed to be kept secret was publicized, and every terrorist in the world now knows exactly where our nuclear supplies are stored and maps showing where, in detail, these nuclear supplies are stored.

Now, hopefully, they're very secure and there's a lot of guards around there to protect us. But I think it's tragic that top secret information, highly classified information, is being made public at a time when we're fighting a war against terrorism.

It makes absolutely no sense. And those who are responsible for making this public should be held accountable.

Mr. Speaker, the freedoms and the quality of life of Americans is being threatened right here at home not necessarily just by those outside the country but here at home. And I want to tell you why tonight. We're talking about a socialized approach to medicine called national health care that's going to cost billions and billions and probably trillions of dollars. It will take away from people their right to pick their own doctor in many cases; and it will cause the rationing of health care, which will put people, particularly seniors, at the back of the line when it comes to very important things that have to be done to them to keep them alive and healthy. It's going to cost trillions of dollars; and in the budget that we passed earlier, this last month, they put $635 billion in there as a down payment, the first tranche, on socialized medicine which will take away a lot of the freedoms that people have in choosing their own doctor and getting qualified health care.

The second thing that is being threatened is the control of our financial institutions. We passed a TARP bill that bailed out a lot of Wall Street companies and banks. And because of that, a lot of those financial institutions are now directly or indirectly controlled by the Federal Government. I don't think the American people want that. They don't want socialism in this country. They don't want a government- controlled economy or financial institutions.

So we have national health care that is going to be controlled by the government. They don't do a very good job of controlling other things in this country, as many of us know, but national health care and now financial institutions. And then next we have the automobile industry. The government just acquired 61 percent of the control of

General Motors, which we should be calling I guess now Government Motors or Obama Motors because it is, in effect, controlled by the government even though the President said that he really didn't want to control the auto industry. In fact, that's what's being done.

Finally, we're talking about the energy section of our economy. We have a bill that's come out of committee that's going to be on the floor before too long called cap-and-trade. It's going to cost every single family in America between $3,000 to $4,000 in additional expenditures for electricity, additional taxes on gasoline that's passed on to them and other forms of energy because of CO2 emissions. Now we have a terribly difficult economy right now. Can you imagine the average family, having to load on their backs an additional $3,000 to $4,000 in expenses for energy every time you turn on a light switch or anything else? But that's a fact. It's going to happen if that bill becomes law.

In addition to that, we're going to lose millions of jobs because China has already said they would not comply with the same environmental standards we're talking about and neither would India or many other countries in the world that are competitors of ours. So they won't have to pay for those costs that the American people are going to have to pay for, that American industry is going to have to pay for. So those jobs will be going overseas, millions of them, because we're loading on the backs of individuals and American industry additional taxes and expenses that our competitors around the world will not have to pay. So when they make a car, a truck or a refrigerator, they'll be able to do it with less expense because they don't have to live up to the same environmental standards that we do.

This is a very difficult time for America. We're losing jobs. We see people suffering all across this country. But I'm concerned not only about today, but I'm concerned about tomorrow. We don't want to see this governmental structure that we hold so dear and the freedoms we hold so dear go right out the window, and that's what's happening today right before our very eyes. We see the government taking over the health care industry, the financial institutions, the automobile industry; and now they're going to try to take over the energy industry as well.

I hope my friends across this country and my colleagues are paying attention because this government is turning very rapidly toward a controlled economy which is called socialism, and that's anathema to this country and should be anathema to every single American.

Madam Speaker, the CIA and our other intelligence agencies have protected this country from every attempt at a terrorist attack since 9/11.

And yet the Speaker of this House recently said that the CIA had been lying to her and to Congress. According to title 18 of U.S. Code, that is a felony. And if the CIA lies to the Congress, there should be a penalty. They should go to jail.

But the Speaker will not allow, and the Democrats will not allow, there to be an investigation as to whether or not the Speaker's allegations are accurate. And it's very sad because she is impeding and impairing the CIA from doing its job.

We haven't had a terrorist attack in 7\1/2\ years because of their intelligence capability, and because they've done their job. And they have been hurt, severely, by the accusations leveled by the Speaker of the House, and she is not willing to prove that.

Today we introduced a resolution to investigate this, and every Democrat in the House voted against it. I think it's tragic.

This country is at war with the terrorists. We need to do everything we can to protect our intelligence agencies. And if she said they lied, then she has to prove it.