Floor Statements

Madam Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Before I get to my remarks, let me join in the thanks for Chairman Wolf and Ranking Member Fattah and for their staffs for all of the hours that they put in here tonight. I have sat here and listened to all of these amendments. I have appreciated the patience you all have exhibited through this.

Madam Chairman, many small businesses around the country are struggling to compete against unfair, low-priced foreign imports. They are intimidated by the cost of the legal challenge to push back. The intent and purpose of this amendment is simple. It transfers $1.5 million to the International Trade Commission to provide legal and technical assistance to small businesses seeking a remedy.

Time and time again, small businesses are losing business against unfair, low-cost imports that flood this country. Something needs to be done. Small businesses need help.

They don't have access to the same legal resources as larger companies, and they can't afford the cost to file a claim against large state-supported industries like we find in China.

In West Virginia, we have one particular company that manufactures glass lead-free marbles. The company has fewer than 50 employees, and it has asked our office a very simple question: When the average cost to file an antidumping claim is between $1 million and $2 million, how can a small manufacturer afford access to justice?

The Federal Government provides pro bono attorneys in criminal cases for those who can't afford representation. Why not offer something similar to our small businesses facing unfair dumping competition?

On two occasions last year, this particular company had the opportunity to bid on significant contracts that would have allowed it to hire back laid-off workers, plus add an additional 20 people. Both times, the company was knocked out by questionable Chinese competition.

A recent contract was offered for 300 million marbles per year. That contract would have guaranteed 300 days of production for hardworking Americans. Again, a Chinese company undercut them unfairly.

Unfortunately, we have seen this story before with Chinese currency manipulation and State subsidies that have crushed our tin, rebar, and hot rolled steel industries, among others. The ITC must have the tools to protect our small businesses, and this amendment is a step in the right direction.

Let's be clear, Madam Chairman. Do we want to keep talking about jobs? Or do we want to do something about it? Supporting this amendment will be an immense help for small employers in fighting back against unfair trade.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit the Department of Defense from spending money on climate change policies forced upon them by the Obama administration.

We shouldn't be diverting our financial resources away from the primary missions of our military and our national security in pursuit of an ideology.

For example, earlier this year, the President diverted crucial funding on rural sewer and water line grants to promote his climate change initiatives.

Let's make it clear. I acknowledge that climate change is occurring. The climate has always been changing. The question is whether or not, given the global unrest from these rogue nations and our war on terrorism, whether we

should be diverting our funds to support an ideology instead of maximizing our investments in national security.

Now, climate change alarmists contend that man-made CO2 is the cause of climate change. Most people may not realize that 96 percent of all the CO2 emissions occur naturally, and America's CO2 emissions' contribution to the global community is actually less than 1 percent, Mr. Chairman. But even with these facts, decarbonizing America's economy is still a long-term goal of the climate alarmists. But to what end?

If America totally stopped burning coal--I mean this, Mr. Chairman. If every coal-fired powerhouse, factory, school, institution, if every institution in America stopped burning coal today, we would reduce the emissions of CO2 in the globe around the world by 0.2 percent. Think about that, Mr. Chair, 0.2 percent. Within 5 years, the rest of the world's CO2 emissions would make up the difference while our entire economy would have been turned upside down. We would have gained nothing in America at considerable cost to our country's economy.

Yesterday, Secretary of State John Kerry was quoted saying: ``If we make the necessary efforts to address climate change, and supposing we are wrong, what's the worst that can happen?''

``What's the worst that can happen?'' What about spending trillions of dollars, the loss of millions of jobs, more expensive electric bills, and making our economy less competitive?

People like this talk about these issues as if there is no downside or cost to what they are advocating. Mr. Chairman, you and I know that is not the case.

Germany is switching back to coal-fired power, and China and India are building coal-fired power plants every week. America is the only industrialized nation discouraging the use of coal and other fossil fuels.

Leadership expert John Maxwell once said: ``He who thinks he leads but has no followers is only taking a walk.''

The President should look around. He is alone on this issue. We shouldn't be putting our funds for the military and our defense at risk by diverting funds for an ideologically motivated agenda.

If this administration truly wishes to address the problem of CO2 emissions, they should help the rest of the world tackle the deforestation of our tropical rain forests.

Al Gore and the Sierra Club acknowledge that deforestation in Africa and the Amazon is five to six times more of a polluter than the combination of every coal-fired powerhouse in America--five to six times worse. These tropical forests are being destroyed because developing nations don't have access to affordable electricity for heating and cooking and clean water.

Unfortunately, the debate on this issue has turned to name-calling. One of my colleagues today has called those of us who disagree with the President over this issue ``irresponsible,'' ``Republican science deniers,'' and ``members of the Flat Earth Society.'' Al Gore called people who question climate change policies ``immoral, unethical, and despicable.''

Mr. Chairman, you and I are old enough to know that bullying and name-calling are just childish tactics and don't have a place in this debate. Let's stop the name-calling. It is time for an adult conversation.

We should not sacrifice our economy and our national security by diverting funds in pursuit of an ideological crusade. This is not the time to divert our financial resources from our military for climate change purposes when we are confronting Syria, Iran, Russia, Libya, and other rogue nations around the world. In addition, we have Boko Haram, Hamas, al Qaeda, and other terrorist groups promoting instability and threatening liberty and freedom around the world.

Consequently, this amendment will ensure we maximize our military might without diverting funds for a politically motivated agenda. I urge all of my colleagues to support this amendment.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor mothers across America.

Mothers play an incredible role in our lives. We have all seen the sacrifices they make to raise their children and the care and devotion they dedicate to them. We know their commitment.

Mothers have been our greatest advocates. When we were young, they cared for us when we were sick, supported us in our pursuits, lifted us up when we fell down, and read to us at night. They held our hands when we needed them.

Mothers work 8 to 10 hours a day in the workforce, come home and do the cooking, the laundry, and help with the homework, and then get up the next day and do it all over again.

So when was the last time we actually took a moment to say thank you to our mothers and grandmothers? Do enough people take time to stop and say, Thanks, Mom?

There is one person who did so in a very special way. She was a young lady born in 1864 in a small coal mining town in West Virginia. Her mother had worked during the Civil War to provide nursing care and promote better sanitation, helping save thousands of lives on both sides of the conflict. When she passed away in 1902, this young lady, Anna Jarvis, wanted to celebrate her mother's life and came up with the idea of a national honor for mothers: Mother's Day.

Consequently, in 1908, Anna Jarvis organized the very first official Mother's Day celebration, which took place in the Andrews Methodist Episcopal Church in Grafton, West Virginia. However, Anna wanted more people to honor mothers.

She worked with a department store owner in Philadelphia, and soon thousands of people started attending Mother's Day events at retail stores all across America. Following these successes, Anna resolved to see her holiday added to the national calendar. She argued that the national holidays were biased towards male achievements and that the accomplishments of mothers deserve a day of appreciation.

Anna Jarvis started a letter-writing campaign to newspapers and politicians urging them to adopt a special day honoring motherhood. By 1912, many States, towns, and churches had adopted Mother's Day as an annual event.

Her persistence paid off. In 1914, President Woodrow Wilson signed a measure officially recognizing the second Sunday in May as Mother's Day.

Anna Jarvis, who never married or had children of her own, dedicated her life to establishing a day to honor her mother and all mothers across America.

This Sunday, we will celebrate the 100th anniversary of Mother's Day. This holiday is just a small way to show our gratitude to our mothers and grandmothers. This Sunday, we can stop for a moment to simply say thank you. Because when our mothers are gone, that loss reaches into all of our hearts and touches each of us, for no longer will we hear the sound of their voice, the touch of their hand, or that warm embrace. It causes a huge loss in all of our lives.

We should pause on this one day to say thank you to our mothers, who love us in spite of ourselves.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that this Mother's Day we honor the dedication and vision of Anna Jarvis, as well as all of our mothers.

Mr. Speaker, on April 14, we lost a friend in West Virginia. Mick Staton and I had known each other for some time. I considered him a true friend, someone who had a passion for West Virginia.

He was a trailblazer for numbers of us, all through West Virginia, in trying different techniques, campaign styles, and work ethic. He made a difference for numbers of his conservatives in West Virginia. He was elected to the House of Representatives on behalf of the Second District.

He brought with him a background of work with the National Guard for 8 years. His role here in the House meant a lot to him, and after he left, whenever I would run into him, Mr. Speaker, he would always ask: What about something new? What is happening? Because he cared passionately about our country and the State of West Virginia.

Afterwards, after leaving office, he served as the chief political adviser for the United States Chamber of Commerce. He continued his mission to try to get the message across of how we can be a better Nation, stronger, more vibrant, because he cared very much.

As you heard, he has left behind his wife, Lynn, and two adult kids: David ``Mick'' Staton, Jr., and his daughter, Cynthia.

Mr. Speaker, again, we have lost a friend. I would ask that we have just a moment of silence on behalf of the family.

Mr. Speaker, March is National Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month. Every year at this time we all bring attention and understanding to the needs and the potential of people with developmental disabilities.

As an individual with a hearing disability and a grandfather of a child who has CHARGE syndrome, I am very familiar with the hardships of overcoming these disabilities.

We must all think of ways that would be more inclusive, respectful for our communities, schools, and our workforce.

Interning for us in our Washington office we are fortunate to have a young woman who happens to have Down syndrome. She is also attending a local university. We look forward to those days we have her in our office. Her cheery disposition and her work ethic is infectious.

I encourage everyone to engage with people in our communities who have developmental disabilities and recognize their talents and abilities that will make this a better Nation.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment would prohibit agencies under this legislation from using the social cost of carbon that this administration implemented under executive order. Late on a Friday afternoon in June of 2013, this increase in the cost estimate for the social cost of carbon showed up in an obscure rule regarding microwave ovens. In typical fashion with this administration, there was no public debate, no stakeholder comment, and no vote in Congress for this estimate which increased the cost over 50 percent. But they didn't consider the social cost of mental anguish and health care for those that lose their job as a result.

Then again, this is the same administration who issued a de facto ban on new coal-fired powerhouses and refused to hold listening sessions in the areas most affected by fossil fuels. Coal production is down throughout Appalachia, and down by nearly half over the last 5 years under this administration.

Too many people in Washington just don't get it. When you shut down the fossil fuel industry in a community--in particular, a coal mine-- you shut down an entire community. Railroad workers, machinists, timber and coal industries, pharmacists, and schoolteachers all are effected by these kinds of policies. Entire communities, the social fabric of our Nation, are on edge while this administration's ideologically driven policies are threatening hundreds of thousands of jobs all across America.

This is the same President who, in 2008, said he would bankrupt the coal industry. This has become personal to me, Mr. Chairman, and many people throughout the coalfields of America. The rest of the world is investing in coal, building new plants, and increasing their consumption of coal--but not here in America.

This President is gambling with our economy and risking America's future. For a President who likes to talk about fairness, Mr. Chairman, blaming our fossil fuels as a health risk isn't fair.

But then again, is it fair for the EPA to require standards that can't be achieved? Is it fair to blame man for climate change when naturally occurring CO2 emissions represent 96 percent naturally, while U.S. coal emissions contributed only two-tenths? Let me say that again. Two-tenths of 1 percent of the emissions occur from coal-fired powerhouses.

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

Mr. Chairman, I think we all can admit that CO2 emissions have increased. In the last numbers of years, 200 years, CO2 emissions have increased from 320 parts per million to 400 parts per million. During this same period of time, however, population has expanded by eight times. Life expectancy across the world has doubled. Human cancers and viral diseases have decreased. Do opponents of our fossil fuels truly believe our society will be developed on anything other than cheap, abundant, and reliable sources of energy such as coal and natural gas?

Fossil fuels have lifted billions of people out of poverty. CO2 is essential to human life. In The New York Times, Bill Gates was quoted as saying:

If you could pick just one thing to reduce poverty, by far

you would pick energy.

According to statistics from the EIA, in 2010, 80 percent of the world's GDP is attributed to fossil fuels. This represents $60 trillion.

However, the opponents of this amendment and fossil fuels in general turn a blind eye to the suffering of over 1.3 billion people across the world who have no access to electricity for heating, cooking, and water supplies. That is a social travesty.

To quote one climate scientist we spoke with:

Just so radical environmentalists can feel better about

themselves, they prevent families and children living in

poverty from having access to the most dependable and

affordable energy resources.

That, Mr. Chairman, is immoral.

In closing, I would like to thank Chairman Goodlatte for his staunch support of this amendment and his hard work on the underlying legislation. I urge all of my colleagues to accept this amendment and the legislation. Poverty is not just the number one threat to the environment and health in our society, but throughout the world in general.

Mr. Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Virginia, Chairman Goodlatte.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, under this legislation, the EPA is required to submit a report to Congress regarding the impacts this proposed regulation will have on the economy, our competitiveness, our job losses, and electricity rates.

Quite frankly, many here in Congress and the constituents we represent across America have come not to trust the EPA to tell the truth about the impacts the proposed New Source Performance Standard rule or the upcoming existing source rule will have on our Nation.

The amendment before us adds stakeholders with whom the EPA should consult when finalizing this report. This includes the Energy Information Agency, who will provide the EPA with the necessary statistics and background. It includes the Comptroller General who oversees the Government Accountability Office because the GAO's reports have led to hearings and legislation, billions of dollars in taxpayer savings and improvements to a wide range of government programs and services.

It also includes the National Institute of Standards and Technology, who works with industry to develop and apply our Nation's technology, measurements, and standards, and, finally, the National Energy Technology Laboratory, under the direction of the Department of Energy. NETL has been leading the charge in working with the private sector and academia in developing carbon capture and sequestration technologies.

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

Mr. Chairman, during the House debate recently on Congressman Gardner's House bill H.R. 4480, the Domestic Energy and Jobs bill, I offered a similar amendment. This amendment passed by voice vote and ensured that NETL had a seat at the table.

As background and for those of you who are unaware, NETL is our only government research, design, and development laboratory dedicated to domestic energy sources. Last year alone, NETL worked with academia and the private sector on over 1,000 projects. This represented over 55,000 jobs and $12 billion in project funding in every State and nearly every congressional district. It is only fitting that they, along with others, are included in this process.

Let's be clear here. If we support transparency by having relevant agencies consult with the EPA, these same agencies who provide us with statistics, develop our standards, develop our technology, and keep our agencies and Congress in line and accountable, then you would support this amendment. Members of Congress consult with their staffs, their respective committees, other Members' offices, and their constituents, so it is fitting the EPA should do the same under this amendment.

Chairman Whitfield and his staff are to be commended for their hard work to put together such an incredible bipartisan effort in this legislation. I am a proud cosponsor to work with him and encourage all my colleagues to support this amendment and, more importantly, the underlying bill.

With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chair, once again, I would like to reference section 3 of the underlying bill. The amendment would strengthen the analysis and reporting the EPA is required to develop under this legislation.

One of the problems our coal, gas, and oil industries face is the vast ideologically motivated regulations they must endure, such as the New Source Performance Standards. However, other nations don't seem to impose

such burdensome policies and regulations on their industries. Instead, countries in the Middle East and Asia promote their fossil fuel businesses and work to make it easier for those countries to get their fossil fuels to market. Mr. Chairman, it is called fairness.

Now, I am sure you will hear that some of the opponents of this in the past have falsely claimed that this amendment is flawed and too broad. We have heard that this amendment might open up a Pandora's box of issues as we heard from our friends 2 years ago when I offered a similar amendment. That is simply not true, not accurate.

This amendment and legislation will make certain that the United States remains viable in its manufacturing on a global scale, ensures that we don't put more people and their families or children out on the street or with uncertainty, and we can provide them with certainty and access to abundant and affordable electricity. This amendment is about protecting our liberties and providing transparency.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I thank Congressman Waxman.

Under this amendment, the EPA is required, as he just stated, is required to take into account the economic impacts this rule could have on our global competitiveness and the required capital investments and costs for operations and maintenance of new equipment.

We know that, under the New Source Performance Standards rule, the cost of electricity could skyrocket by as much as 70 percent. This cost will be passed on to the consumers. Consequently, American manufacturers will indeed be put at a global disadvantage, and many will lose their business.

We have seen testimony by economists, academics, and scientists who say that, under this proposed regulation, capital costs will increase by as much as 110 percent. This is unconscionable. At a time when Saudi Arabia, China, and India are helping their job creators thrive and open up global opportunities for them, this administration and its ideologically motivated EPA are exporting jobs, trading uncertainty, and trying to decarbonize America with little to show for health and economic benefits.

The EPA needs to look at what other nations are doing to grow, stabilize, and sustain their fossil fuel industries. This amendment will help us show how we can improve and stop hindering the development of our natural resources.

Ultimately, I offered this amendment because we are supposed to be a nation leading by example over the rest of the world. With nearly 23 million people underemployed or unemployed, we really ought to be saying to our regulators: Just because you can doesn't mean you should.

Mr. Chairman, again, I wish to thank Mr. Upton and Mr. Whitfield for their support of this amendment and the underlying bill that goes with it. Mr. Whitfield's work on the overall bill shows his true leadership and caring for the people of Appalachia and all across America.

This country is a leader of the world, an innovator, and a job creator. It is time that it reins in the excessive regulations that create burdens resulting in families, children, husbands, and spouses worried about tomorrow. It is time their regulators pull back in. This amendment and this legislation overall will create that ability that we have in the American Dream again, but not an American Dream that is driven by regulations.

I urge all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H.R. 2126.

While there are many differing views in Congress, there is one common ground, and that is energy efficiency. Finding ways to use energy more efficiently is simply common sense.

This legislation will provide this country with a market-driven, voluntary, best practice approach to reduce energy consumption. It is an area where Republicans and Democrats can work together efficiently. That is why Peter Welch and I have developed a wonderful working relationship and developed an issue on energy that crosses this and other pieces of legislation.

As one of just two engineers in Congress, and having spent nearly 50 years in the construction industry, I understand what steps we need to take to make our buildings more efficient. That is why we brought together a broad coalition of support for this legislation, supported by everyone from manufacturers, restaurants, contractors, labor, environmental groups. Even the gaming industry is supporting this legislation. It is estimated to lower energy costs by over $2 billion and result in reduced carbon emissions by nearly 12 million tons. It helps move our Nation closer to energy independence.

I would like to thank Chairman Upton and Ranking Member Waxman for allowing this bipartisan bill to come to the floor, and Congressman Whitfield for helping out on all the legislation, as well as Mr. Welch.

Engineers know how to make buildings operate more efficiently. Maybe our next step would be to make Congress run more efficiently.

I urge all my colleagues to support this bipartisan legislation.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the memory of Michael Dale Garrett, a Firefighter and EMT-I with the Nutter Fort Volunteer Firefighter Department, who lost his life serving in the line of duty on February 1, 2014.

Michael, or ``Mikey'' as he is known by his family, attended South Harrison High School, Alderson-Broaddus College and was scheduled to graduate from Fairmont State University in May with an associate's degree in emergency services. Michael's life was serving others as a first responder. He started when he was only a teenager and had experience and knowledge beyond his 28 years. He trained other firefighters and EMT personnel and was proud of his work.

Michael's passion in life was helping others. Every call he took meant the potential for danger but he did his job as a professional up until his last call. His sense of humor and smile will be remembered by his family and friends. The Nutter Fort Fire Department want to stress that he died a hero, doing what he loved and lived for.

I offer my condolences to his family, friends, colleagues and all those who knew Michael Garrett. We honor his memory and his dedicated service to others.

Thank you, Congressman, for your leadership on this matter.

According to Tom Miller, the West Virginia representative to the National Volunteer Fire Council, 95 percent of all fire departments in West Virginia are staffed by volunteers.

To pay for their training, equipment, and operating costs, these men and women are forced to raise money through bake sales, pancake breakfasts, steak dinners, and standing in the streets, humbly, at the stoplights, holding their boots out and asking people to put money into those boots. And now these financially strapped fire departments have been told that they may have to pay health care costs.

Mr. Miller has projected that the added cost of paying for this health care for these volunteers will force some departments to close their doors, putting families and businesses at risk.

Mr. Speaker, cutting emergency services upon which rural America depends is clearly an unintended consequence of ObamaCare. Therefore, we must exempt our volunteer emergency responders from this additional cost by bringing this bill to the floor as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, this week marks the 45th anniversary of the explosion at Consolidation Coal's No. 9 Mine in Farmington, WV. We remember the 78 miners who

lost their lives in what is known as the Farmington Mine Disaster.

On the morning of November 20, 1968 multiple explosions rocked the small town of Farmington and the surrounding area. The blasts were felt as far as 12 miles away. Ninety-nine men went down in the mine that day, and only 21 made it out alive.

The sacrifice of these miners and their families was not in vain. The disaster led to historic safety changes for the mining industry. The Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 was signed into law as a result and generations of coal miners have benefited from the improvements in working conditions.

Coal and coal mining is in West Virginia's lifeblood. Tens of thousands of West Virginians rely on coal to make their livelihood. Even today, mining coal is a difficult and often dangerous job. We must never forget the important contribution these men and women make to America.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the 1st Congressional District of West Virginia and the families of these 78 miners, I remember the victims of this tragedy and honor the sacrifice they made.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman.

I rise today to be the voice of the citizens of the First District of West Virginia and support House bill H.R. 3350. Let me share just two of the messages of the thousands that we have received.

Linda from Philippi, West Virginia, writes:

I am losing my health insurance due to ObamaCare. My policy

has been canceled, and I am being forced to enter the

exchange. I like my current policy. Under the exchange, I

will be forced to pay $200 more. I am being hurt by

ObamaCare. This simply isn't fair.

And Sherry from Weirton, West Virginia, tells us:

My parents, both retired, received a letter from their

insurance company letting them know their new rate starting

in January. The increase is so much they can't afford it. I

pray that they can continue to receive the health care that

they choose so they can continue to be healthy. They deserve

better.

Mr. Speaker, these are only two of the stories out of the thousands we could share. Consequently, I am urging my colleagues to support this particular legislation.

Mr. Speaker, for months the President repeatedly pledged that he would initiate long overdue negotiations on matters ranging from tax reform to regulatory reform and work with Republicans on the flaws emerging with his health care law. His stipulation was that Congress must first reopen government and raise the debt limit. Consequently, Mr. Speaker, last week I voted to end the budget impasse and tentatively cooperate with the President. While this agreement does not solve our long term challenges, it does allow us to move forward and begin crucial negotiations on how to resolve our budget challenges.

Throughout the fall, President Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid demanded a blank check and refused to negotiate. This plan is not a blank check. It was forged through negotiations and provides a short term extension for funding at lower spending levels than the Senate wanted. It includes a long overdue conference on a federal budget. The plan also includes a much needed change in the Affordable Care Act to ensure the income of individuals receiving subsidies is verified instead of relying on an honor system.

Most importantly, the plan ensures a host of other negotiations pledged by the President will move forward so we can address our growing debt, improve our economy, and fix the problems with the health care law. President Obama has promised on numerous occasions that once the government was open and the debt ceiling was raised he would be willing to negotiate ``on anything.'' This includes the budget, economic reforms, entitlement programs, and even the health care law. In the next few months the American public should be keenly aware whether he does what he said he would do. Finally Congress can hold the President accountable for his pledge to negotiate with Congress over these impediments to economic recovery.

Over the past several weeks, conservatives put up a strong fight to stop President Obama's health care law from being fully implemented. After trying to defund the law, delay it for a year, and ensure fairness so that members of Congress don't get special treatment, it became clear that our tactics weren't working and we needed to regroup.

Given that Republicans are a minority in Washington we need to be realistic about what we can achieve. That does not mean we will give up the fight. We just need to be smart about where and when we choose to fight and pick battles we can win.

As we move forward with negotiations over the budget and other issues, we need to focus on ways we can achieve our objectives. We need to seek true reforms that don't just put off hard decisions to the next crisis. The challenges we face--a weak economy, a growing debt, a health care law that isn't working--are too important to just push off into the future.

The next step to overcome these challenges is for the President and Senator Reid to open the negotiations we were promised.

Mr. Speaker, for months, President Obama promised he would initiate long-overdue negotiations on issues from health care to tax and regulatory reform, all factors holding back economic growth. But he linked this pledge to Congress reopening the government and raising the debt limit.

His promise to address the critical drivers of our economy is why last week I voted to end the budget impasse and tentatively agree to cooperate with the President. With the government reopened, it is time for those promises that he made to be upheld and for negotiations to begin.

Our economy is still way too weak. Let's look at the facts:

Ninety-seven percent of all the jobs created in America this past year have been part time;

Millions of our workers are seeing their hours cut;

Participation in the workforce is at an all-time low the last 35 years, with 90 million adults sitting on the sidelines.

Our neighbors and our friends are struggling and are uncomfortable about their future. Our latest college graduates can't find jobs, and millions more of our country's youth have quit searching for employment. It is time to reduce the uncertainty and help these families.

The House has already passed dozens of bills to help grow the economy, including tax reform, limiting excessive regulations, debt reduction, and yes, reforming ObamaCare.

The President has repeatedly said he is willing to negotiate on all of these economic issues. As recently as October 3, he stated:

I'm happy to negotiate with you on anything. I don't think

any one party has a monopoly on wisdom.

Then, on October 8, the President said:

Serious negotiations could proceed around every item in the

budget.

He then went on to say that negotiation would not be limited just to the budget. He said:

I will sit down and work with anyone of any party, not only

to talk about the budget . . . about ways to improve the

health care system . . . and about ways that we can shrink

our long-term deficits.

Congress has now upheld its end of the bargain. The American people can now judge whether the President will uphold his.

In the next 90 days, let's demonstrate that Congress can indeed work in a bipartisan fashion and tackle our most serious problems now: a weak economy, a growing national debt, and a health care law that isn't ready for implementation.

It is important to note that the House took steps necessary to initiate negotiation. Therefore, in fairness, the President and the Senate need to come to the table. History will record whether the President fulfills his repeated pledges and addresses these barriers to America's economic exceptionalism.

Last week, many of us in the Chamber extended a hand of bipartisan cooperation to the President. But as President Reagan once said:

Trust, but verify.

Mr. Speaker, the President and his allies claim that the shutdown of government is about one thing--a Republican obsession with ObamaCare.

Mr. Speaker, they are missing the point completely.

For the past 3 years, the House has been working to improve our economy, to create private sector jobs, and to address barriers that inhibit economic growth. ObamaCare, unfortunately, has emerged as one of the largest challenges standing in the way of job creation: workers are having their hours cut; families and businesses are facing higher premiums; employers aren't expanding because of the uncertainty.

Fixing the health care law would have the quickest impact on the economy; but, in fairness, we can't do that unless the other side sits down and talks to us. Thus far, the Senate and the President have rejected all efforts of the House and refuse to negotiate.

Mr. Speaker, this debate should be about caring for the American people, their futures, and the liberties we share in America. We want to reopen the government and help families find jobs, but that requires that the House and the Senate and the President sit down together and have an adult conversation about fixing our economy.