Floor Statements

I thank the gentleman from South Carolina for yielding this time.

I rise to add my voice to those calling for the repeal of the 1099 provision.

H.R. 4, very simply put, Mr. Speaker, is about protecting small business owners, job creators in New Hampshire and across our Nation, from onerous paperwork burdens. Simple as that. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Currently, this piece of legislation, a component of the health care legislation, requires those small business owners to comply with the Federal Government every time they spend $600 with an individual vendor over the course of a calendar year. I've talked to many small business owners in my home State of New Hampshire, who have told me specifically how this would hurt their small businesses.

We should be here to encourage small business owners to innovate, to expand. We should make sure that we give them the predictability of this House through public policy that will allow them to create jobs. The heart of New Hampshire's economy is the small business owner as 80 percent of our economy is reliant on them.

I ask that my colleagues join me in repealing the 1099 provision.

I thank the gentlelady from Tennessee for yielding time.

Madam Chair, I am not embarrassed to be here as part of this institution. I am honored. I am honored to represent New Hampshire in its quest for fiscal discipline, fiscal responsibility, and fiscal restraint.

Ladies and gentlemen, we are at the precipice of our country in terms of spending. We simply offer an amendment that further reduces the necessary spending restraints our country is demanding. This is about listening to our country, listening to the people who just elected this Congress to restore discipline with respect to our spending recognitions in Washington.

Ladies and gentlemen, this amendment, which I am happy and honored to cosponsor, first cuts our own institution. In New Hampshire, I say to the people in New Hampshire, we are going to cut first ourselves before we make other tough cuts in this country.

This amendment further reduces our own expenditure. And, finally, it takes 5.5 percent across the board with a few exceptions in the eight non-security divisions of the CR.

I support this amendment. I think we have to get serious about spending in this Nation and send a strong message that we are listening to the American people.

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

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of my amendment, a proposed ban on Project Labor Agreements, also known as PLAs.

President Obama signed an Executive order nearly 2 years ago imposing PLAs on Federal construction projects. A PLA mandates that whenever the government pays for a project, union workers must be hired for the job. This stifles competition and inflates the project's cost by steering scarce tax dollars straight into directly union pockets. The previous administration banned PLAs. And according to a study cited by the Cato Institute, the ban saved taxpayers as much as $2.6 billion in 2008 alone.

Mr. Chairman, this is a spending reduction bill focused on saving taxpayer dollars to the tune of $2.6 billion annually. My amendment simply states no government money can be used to pay for any project that requires a PLA. This solves a significant problem. This is not against our unions. It is about providing equal footing between union and nonunion contractors.

Considering the massive debt and deficit we are now struggling under, I feel we can't afford at this point to waste more taxpayer dollars. My goal here is to get more effective and efficient government. This amendment creates a level playing field that encourages fair and open competition for Federal construction contracts funded by this bill.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I would add that currently in New Hampshire, my home State, we have a Job Corps center that is slated to be built, $35 million project, which is going to help up to 500 youth annually in the State of New Hampshire. The PLA is exactly what is stopping this project from occurring. We would like to not only expand the opportunity here in New Hampshire but across the country to get these projects moved forward, do them in a fair and equitable way.

And I also note that our friends from the Associated Builders and Contractors support this amendment, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Federation of Independent Businesses, as well as the National Black Chamber of Commerce.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I would simply reiterate that the study pointing to 2008 shows the ban on PLAs saved taxpayers $2.6 billion. Let's allow all small business owners throughout our country to go after these types of projects. It's fair and it's equitable.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I finally reiterate this proposal is a spending reduction bill to the tune of approximately $2.6 billion annually in savings. It allows our small business owners and subcontractors to bid on projects across our Nation, get them back to work. I would ask my colleagues to vote in favor of the Guinta amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Offered By: Mr. Guinta

Amendment No. 166: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Madam Speaker, I rise to add my voice to those calling for the end of overregulation that is strangling our small businesses here in my home State of New Hampshire and across our great Nation. I believe that this is a central focus of the challenges that we face in this 112th Congress.

As other Members have suggested and stated, our Nation is run by small business owners, by employers who are hardworking, put their time and energy and effort into creating something, building something, creating new jobs for new opportunities. In my home State of New Hampshire, about 75 to 80 percent of our economy is dependent upon small business.

And what I heard in the testimony, in committee, and what I'd like to convey today is my great and grave concern for the fact that every small business owner has to pay $10,585 per employee for the regulatory burdens and requirements. That is a grand impediment to the creation of a small business opportunity. This is something that is centrally focused, that we have to address as a Congress. And I certainly urge the passage of this resolution.

Whether you are Laars, Incorporated in Rochester, New Hampshire, or Tee Enterprises in North Conway, New Hampshire, or J Dubbs in Manchester, New Hampshire, this impediment disallows the incentive that we believe is most important in our Nation.

I, as a Member representing New Hampshire, want to ensure that we create an environment where small business can grow, can succeed and employ people, in our great State and in our Nation.

There are two interesting things going on in New Hampshire: Project labor agreements that are infringing on the ability of a $35 million project being supported; and the OSHA demands over our small businesses. I hope and trust that we can pass this resolution.

Mr. Speaker, on January 29, 2011 Niel Young will be celebrating 15 years of excellence in radio broadcasting on WEZS 1350 AM ``The Advocates.'' Mr. Young has served the public in various capacities at both the local and state levels, and has been a strong advocate for taxpayers in Laconia and the state of New Hampshire.

Known for his colorful character and sharp wit, Mr. Young's radio program aims to inform the public and provide dialogue on the local, state and national issues of the day. Since his first day broadcasting, Mr. Young has fought for the principles that Granite Staters hold so dear.

This is a great day for Mr. Young, his wife Betty, and his listeners. I wish him the very best and many more years on the air.

I thank the chairman from Michigan for yielding the time.

Madam Speaker, I rise to add my voice to those calling for repeal of last year's misguided overhaul of our national health care system. Seldom has a well-intentioned desire, in this case making the system work better, strayed so disastrously off course.

The new law destroys existing jobs, inserts government between you and your family doctor, and allows Washington to still spend more money, more borrowed money. Even worse, it fails to accomplish its primary goal. Instead of making health insurance more affordable, premiums today remain sky high for individuals and employers.

Now we have a two-part opportunity before this Congress. First, we must repeal last year's unconstitutional legislation. Then we need to begin the process of delivering what Americans are demanding, a patient-centered health care system that is effective, efficient, and simply reduces costs.

The Second Amendment: ``A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.''