Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, ``On a blistering evening in Phoenix recently, a group of prominent civic leaders met to talk about America. It didn't take long for the conversation to get around to the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

``That's what happens when smart Americans get to talking about politics these days.

``Topic A is the growing sense that our best days as a Nation are behind us, that our kids won't live as well as we did, that China is in the driver's seat.''

Those were the opening words of an October 2010 Time magazine piece, authored by veteran reporter Joe Klein, who canvassed the country during the height of the campaign season.

Klein's assessment of the national mood was underscored by New York Times columnist David Brooks, who recently wrote: ``The current sour mood is not just caused by high unemployment. It emerges from the fear that America's best days are behind it.''

I believe this foreboding national anxiety is born of certain realities--exploding debts and deficits, shuttered factories, rising unemployment, bloated government, and an acrimonious tenor to our national discourse. People fear that America's influence is waning and our ``shining city on a hill'' is dimming.

I must admit to sharing these same anxieties as a father of five and grandfather of 15. I have never been more concerned about my country's future. Yet I do not believe that the realization of these fears is inevitable. We can walk back from the precipice. We have options. Sober-minded people believe that we must dramatically change course, especially as it relates to our ballooning national debt and deficit-- and I agree.

Yet, are America and her leaders willing to make the tough decisions that are necessary?

The lyrics in Simon and Garfunkel's song ``The Boxer''--``Man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest''--aptly describe the mood in Washington when it comes to addressing Federal spending.

Within days of the President's fiscal commission report on the dire consequences of the failure to address growing mandatory spending, it was business as usual with Congress passing and the Obama administration supporting a tax and spending bill with an $857 billion price tag that included a yearlong ``payroll tax holiday,'' raiding the Social Security trust fund at a cost of $112 billion, without paying for it, thereby increasing the national debt.

So the question before us is: Will Washington summon the courage and the fortitude to make the tough decisions, to govern based on principle and not politics, to lead the country toward a brighter tomorrow even if it means sacrificing in the short term?

Historically, Americans are willing to sacrifice.

Many of our countrymen have made the ultimate sacrifice on our own shores and in distant lands, in places like Antietam, Normandy, Saigon, Kandahar, and Baghdad.

It is on their shoulders we stand--wobbly at times, but stand nonetheless. The Nation's future now falls to us. Will we step up to the plate or will we fail to act?

For too long, routinely increasing the amount of money that government can borrow without taking any action to stem the country's growing debt has been standard operating procedure; but the storm warning signs have been posted, and I am heeding their ominous call.

When Congress is asked to increase the statutory debt limit, which will likely happen in the next few months, I will vote ``no'' unless-- and let me be completely clear here--there is a firm commitment to deal with the larger issue or the vote itself is tied to a plan to put America on a path to financial responsibility.

I have come to this decision based on a multitude of factors that I will explore in the remaining time. Consider these grim realities:

Our Nation is now more than $14 trillion in debt. We have accumulated a $1 trillion deficit every year. Just last Thursday, both Moody's Investment Service and Standard & Poor's again cautioned the U.S. that its coveted AAA credit rating is at risk if the country's deteriorating fiscal situation is not corrected.

The practical implications of a downgraded credit rating are severe. The cost to borrow money will rise. Everything from a home loan to a car loan to a student loan will increase. Interest on the debt was $202 billion in 2010. That's nearly $4 billion a week. In 2021, interest on the debt is projected to be $1 trillion a year, or roughly $2.7 billion a day.

Unsustainable debt in Europe and the resulting economic woes and austerity measures led to riots in the streets. Is it just a matter of time before we see that at home?

If we are on the same trajectory as these countries, their unemployment numbers should give us pause. Spain was at a whopping 19.8 percent in December.

Noted historian Niall Ferguson authored a piece in the April 2010 Foreign Affairs, exploring the theory that great empires often decline swiftly. From Rome to the Ming Dynasty to the British Empire, history is rife with examples of seemingly invincible world powers that collapse in a short period of time.

Ferguson adds that, while there are varied theories about why each of these empires declined in such short order, he said, ``Most imperial falls are associated with fiscal crises.''

If paying $202 billion a year in interest alone isn't a fiscal crisis, I don't know what is. Is America heading off a cliff?

Consider that last year a report from the Congressional Budget Office revealed that for the first time in 25 years Social Security was taking in less in taxes than it was spending on benefits. In addition, recent reports found that as 2011 opens, the first of the baby boomers will turn 65 at the rate of 10,000 a day for the next 19 years. Or consider that just over the past decade foreign ownership of U.S. debt has increased significantly from 5 percent 40 years ago to 46 percent today.

If the U.S. does not begin to rein in spending, every penny of the Federal budget will go to interest on the debt and entitlement spending by 2028. This has grave implications for a host of national priorities.

Ferguson is not alone in his warnings.

In 2007, then-U.S. Comptroller General David Walker warned of ``striking similarities'' between America's current situation and the fall of the Roman Empire.

Respected business leader Norm Augustine, who chaired a National Academies' Commission on American Competitiveness that resulted in the landmark ``Gathering Storm'' report, captured well the situation in which America now finds itself when he said, ``In the technology-driven economy in which we live, Americans have come to accept leadership as the natural and enduring state of affairs; but leadership is highly perishable. It must be constantly re-earned.''

He went on to say, ``Unless we do things dramatically different, including strengthening our investments in research and education, the 21st century will belong to China and India.''

As America sinks deeper into debt, we seem satisfied to live utterly in the moment with no concern for the future. And as our own investments in the future lag, China is forging ahead, making critical gains in education while our children are left in the wake.

One woman in Arizona who spoke to Klein during his heartland travel said pointedly, ``We seem to be mired in mediocrity while China is steaming ahead.'' Do we really want the 21st century, this century, to be the Chinese century? Do we really want to leave our children a country mired in mediocrity?

Last year, a 5-year followup report titled ``Rising Above the Gathering Storm, Revisited'' noted that ``Almost one-third of U.S. manufacturing companies responding to a recent survey say they are suffering from some level of skills shortages.'' This failure to train the next generation of engineers and scientists has a direct bearing on our economy. The U.S. graduates only half the number--half the number-- of physicists today than we did in 1956.

The Gathering Storm report determined that, for the first time in our Nation's history, the younger generation of Americans is less well educated than its parents, and warned that ``the United States appears to be on a course that will lead to a declining standard of living for our children and our grandchildren.''

Against this backdrop, roughly half of America's outstanding publicly held debt is now foreign owned, with China and Saudi Arabia among the largest holders. Saudi Arabia was home to many of the 9/11 terrorists. Saudi Arabia's radical Wahhabism is taught in some of the most extremist mosques and madrassas, including up on the Afghan-Pakistan border. Their textbooks are filled with hateful messages about minority faiths, including Christians and Jews.

A recent New York Times story reported that, ``Saudi donors remain the chief financiers of Sunni militant groups like al Qaeda.'' Is this a country we want to be beholden to financially? Or what about Communist China? It is well documented by the U.S. intelligence community that China's attempt to spy on U.S. agencies and businesses are the most aggressive of all foreign intelligence organizations and, according to the FBI, ``pose a significant threat to the national security'' and compromise U.S. critical national assets.

China also routinely violates the basic human rights of its own people. Even this week, as Chinese President Hu Jintao is afforded the pomp and circumstance of a White House state dinner, Catholic bishops, Protestant pastors, and Tibetan monks are in Chinese jails for practicing their faith.

I've seen how China plundered Tibet. China's abuses do not stop at home. They are a significant arms supplier to the genocidal regime in Khartoum, Sudan. Do we really want China to be our banker? All of these realities must prompt some soul-searching on the part of our Nation's leadership.

Almost 5 years ago, during the last Republican majority, I came to the floor of the House proposing an independent bipartisan commission to address unsustainable Federal spending. It would put everything on the table--entitlements, all other spending, and tax policy. The SAFE Commission--short for Securing America's Future Economy--would operate in a transparent way, holding public meetings across the country to hear from the American people and give them a vested interest in the outcome. Further, it would require Congress to vote on its recommendations.

I reintroduced this legislation with Congressman Jim Cooper in the 110th and 111th Congresses. Senators Kent Conrad and Judd Gregg introduced a similar bill calling for a deficit commission that became the blueprint for the President's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform, or the Simpson-Bowles Commission.

I give credit to the deficit commission. I certainly didn't agree with every part of its report, but the commission's work was an important step in moving the national conversation forward. It put forth serious ideas rather than just kicking the can down the road. And had I been appointed to the commission, while supporting some changes, I would have voted for its final report. I commend its members who voted yes, such as Senator Tom Coburn, Republican of Oklahoma, a champion of low taxes, for having the courage to do so.

The plan set forth by the Simpson-Bowles Commission--supported by a majority of the commission's 18 members--makes it clear that addressing the debt and the deficit isn't just a simple exercise in rooting out waste, fraud, and abuse. It is all well and good to eliminate earmarks, fraud, waste, and abuse and rein in discretionary spending, but these things alone do not come close to solving the debt and the deficit.

The infamous bank robber Willie Sutton reportedly said he robbed banks ``because that's where the money is.'' In our government, the money is in entitlements--Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. Let me say it again: If we do not deal with Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security, we cannot solve this problem. We need to do it in a way that really fixes the problem for us and for the next generation. We need to do it in a way that strengthens America, creating economic growth and jobs. This will be difficult and at times controversial, but the longer we wait we can be certain that it will become more difficult and more controversial.

The commission's forthright assessment about what is necessary to put us in good fiscal standing was a step in the right direction. The success of any endeavor, however, is predicated on actively involving the American people and must require an up-or-down vote in Congress. The President's commission came up short in that regard.

We have a divided government, which necessitates a bipartisan solution, something that can be passed and be enacted into law, and the sooner the better. If we neglect to do this, America will decline, and it will decline on our watch. We will have failed our children and grandchildren. We will have broken faith with the Founding Fathers and past generations who have sacrificed greatly to make this Nation, our Nation, a shining city on a hill.

We can no longer ignore the albatross of debt around our collective necks. That is why, unless there is a firm commitment to deal with the larger financial crisis or the vote itself is tied to a possible debt solution, I will vote against the debt limit increase. And again, I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to consider doing the same.

I don't say this lightly. I am fully aware of the implications. In a recent letter to congressional leadership, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner spoke in near apocalyptic terms about the consequences of default. Even if just a fraction of his analysis is accurate, it is clear that this isn't a decision to be made casually. It is precisely because the stakes are so high that I believe the debt limit vote can serve as a trigger to force congressional action that otherwise will not be taken.

The country does not currently have a credit card limit, and we need one in order to stop the mortgaging of our country's future. Failure to act now on fiscal problems will ensure that in the future there will be tax increases and drastic entitlement reductions, and no money for important discretionary spending such as infrastructure, national security, medical research, and education. The longer it takes to address this issue, the more draconian the options will be when the Nation is forced to change course, as it most assuredly will be.

If you are on Social Security or Medicare, you should insist that the Congress and the administration act. If you are a young adult, you should be worried that your generation will be

significantly less well off than your parents' generation.

If you care about America's global leadership, if you yearn for our country to have the resources to combat global scourges, if you hope for the day when there is a cure for cancer and Alzheimer's, you should press Congress and the administration to step up to the plate now.

We must all ask ourselves: Do we want to make a point or do we want to make a difference? If the answer is the latter, then it is clear that this is a conversation we need to be having today. We must not put it off.

At his 1796 farewell address, George Washington admonished his fellow countrymen, ``We should avoid ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden of which we ourselves ought to bear.'' An apt charge for today's political leadership.

A brief word to America's faith community, who should be intimately concerned with the moral component of this crisis. If we say we care about the poor, we must speak up, for they will be the hardest hit if we fail to act. If we say we are passionate about justice, then we must not be complicit in committing a massive generational injustice.

Not only is our current course immoral, it is un-American. Generations past have always passed the torch of the American Dream to their children and their grandchildren. Presently, we're poised to hand off the struggling flicker of a flame.

The implications of an America on decline also has ripple effects the world over.

In a December 5 Washington Post Outlook piece, author Robert Kaplan hauntingly writes, ``America's ability to bring a modicum of order to the world is simply fading in slow motion.'' A look at the daily headlines and we are reminded that the world is a much more dangerous place when our Nation is perceived as weak, or worse yet, when that perception becomes a reality.

Surely we can agree on the enormity of what is at stake. The precise blueprint for how to move forward may seem blurry at times, but the implications of doing nothing must propel us onward.

If we summon the courage to act, I believe we can see a rebirth in America marked by grand innovations in science and technology that are the wonders of the world, advances in medical research that save millions of lives, and further exploration into the remaining frontier of space and much more.

Columnist Tony Blankley wrote recently, ``America has become a great Nation because we have been an optimistic people who insist on both success and liberty. America's can-do spirit has been the wonder of the ages. It has raised us from a handful of farmers to the colossus of the planet. And if we can regain that spirit, there is not a reason in the world that the 21st century will not be the American century--just as the 20th century was.''

I was reminded once again of that unique American spirit on Election Day when I stopped by the Snow White Grill in Winchester, Virginia. While I was there, one man said to me, ``We are ready! We are prepared to sacrifice. We're ready to do what's right.'' And several others at the lunch counter echoed the same.

But the question remains: Are America's leaders prepared to sacrifice? Are America's leaders prepared to do what's right?

Battle lines have been drawn on both sides.

The MoveOn.orgs of the left and the Americans for Tax Reform of the right have wielded their political influence with remarkable effect, only to paralyze the Congress and the Obama administration on arguably the most important issue of our time. I am not prepared to continue to let that happen.

In 1787, on the final day of the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin was said to have wept when he signed the document. James Madison wrote in a letter to Thomas Jefferson, ``Whilst the last members were signing it,'' he said, ``Dr. Franklin, looking towards the President's chair, at the back of which a rising sun happened to be painted, observed to a few members near him that painters had found it difficult to distinguish in their art a rising sun from a setting sun.''

And then Dr. Franklin remarked that during the course of the session, ``I have often looked at that picture . . . without being able to tell whether it was a rising or setting sun.'' And then Franklin continues, ``Now . . . I have the happiness to know that it is indeed a rising, not a setting sun.''

Every politician loves to say that the sun has barely begun to rise on America and that America's best days are yet ahead.

If we steel ourselves for tough decisions and commit to doing the right thing, if we work for economic and moral rebirth, then we will honestly be able to join the chorus of voices reaching back to our Nation's founding and echoing across the ages which enjoin us to believe that the sun has indeed barely begun to rise on our country and that America's best days are yet to come.

This is a call to action. We are Americans, and we can prevail.

Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 2 o'clock and 5 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until Monday, January 24, 2011, at noon for morning-hour debate and 2 p.m. for legislative business.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the important work of Loudoun Cares, an innovative organization in Virginia's 10th District that promotes the sharing of community services under one roof to save on the overall costs to other nonprofits in the surrounding community. Loudoun Cares is a leader in the local effort to develop a multi-tenant nonprofit center which provides affordable and stable office space and shared services for Loudoun County charities serving families in need.

On October 1, 2010, Loudoun Cares celebrated the completion of renovations to its facility. This innovative collaboration promotes efficiencies and enhances service delivery to citizens in need. It also serves as a model for other communities seeking to develop nonprofit infrastructure that will improve, streamline and consolidate human service deployment.

The ongoing success of the 6-year-old Loudoun Cares is a direct result of a collaboration that includes nonprofits, faith communities, business partners and government.

I would like to recognize and thank Loudoun Cares and its board of directors, staff, volunteers and contributors for their work on behalf of the Loudoun community, especially Andy Johnston, the executive director, and Jennifer Montgomery, director of operations.

Madam Speaker, I join with my colleagues today to honor the 6 who died and the 14 who were wounded, including our own colleague Gabrielle Giffords, in the horror which unfolded last Saturday morning in Tucson, Arizona.

I was at home Saturday checking my iPhone when I saw the shocking news of the shootings and that Congresswoman Giffords and her staff were among the victims. What I read was hard to comprehend. She and her staff were doing their jobs, back in her district on a weekend, meeting with constituents in the finest example of representative government. And in a split second, the lives of those there were forever changed, and in a larger context, all of our lives have changed.

My heart and prayers go out to those who lost their lives and to their families. There was 9-year-old Christina Taylor Green, there to meet her representative because she wanted to become involved in government; Dorothy Morris, there with her husband of over 50 years, George, who was critically injured trying to shield his wife from the shooting; federal district Judge John Roll, who had just come from Mass, which he attended daily; Phyllis Schneck, age 79, who was spending the winter in Arizona; and Dorwan Stoddard, a 76-year-old retired construction worker, who shielded his wife Mavy, who sustained injuries in the shooting. And also slain was Gabe Zimmerman, the 30- year-old community outreach director for Congresswoman Giffords, a congressional staffer like the thousands of dedicated public servants we have the privilege of working with in this House. Just there doing a job he loved serving the people.

I haven't had the privilege of getting to know Gabby as well as some have, but she and I shared an interest in keeping the space program strong. I pray for her full recovery and look forward to working with her again when she returns to this House. From what I know of her through other colleagues, Gabby Giffords epitomizes what every member of this body aspires to be: a dedicated, courageous public servant with a heart of service and an optimism about America that is infectious.

Madam Speaker, we honor the memory of those whose lives were taken last Saturday and express our heartfelt condolences to their families and friends, and we pray for those who were wounded that they will recover quickly, including our colleague, Gabby Giffords.

Madam Speaker, I was deeply saddened and outraged by North Korea's recent attack on Yeonpyeong island which killed four South Koreans and wounded 20. Officials estimated that the North had fired roughly 200 artillery shells onto Yeonpyeong. The November 23 attack was the first on civilian-populated areas since the Korean War.

This is just the latest provocation on the part of Pyongyang--a regime infamous for its deplorable human rights record and Soviet style gulags.

Recently North Korea showed Dr. Siegfried Hecker, the former head of the U.S. Los Alamos National Laboratory, a new modern uranium enrichment facility with 2,000 centrifuges. The North Koreans claimed it is producing low enriched uranium destined for fuel for a new light- water nuclear reactor. According to the Congressional Research Service, ``Although Dr. Hecker has said that the centrifuge plant and the new reactor appear to be designed primarily for civilian nuclear power, the uranium facilities could also be used to produce fissile material suitable for nuclear weapons.''

These are deeply troubling developments. During this time of heightened tensions in the Korean Peninsula we must actively work with our long-term ally South Korea to ensure a lasting peace in the region and continue to expose the true nature of the North Korea regime which the international community can no longer deny.

Mr. Chair, I support extending the 2001 and 2003 income tax cuts for all taxpayers, reducing or even eliminating the estate tax, and limiting the impact of the alternative minimum tax. If those were the only issues before us today, I would vote for that package to reduce the tax burden on Americans.

But this package is a bridge too far and I will vote no. With this package we are saying ``charge it.'' We aren't even making an attempt to pay for it. We are voting to add over $857 billion to our Nation's already massive, nearly $14 trillion debt. This is less than two weeks after the president's debt commission issued its a report called ``A Moment of Truth,'' which outlined the looming financial crisis that threatens the future of our country.

We're accumulating a trillion dollar deficit every year. This year, we are paying $202 billion a year in interest on our debt. That's nearly $4 billion a week.

By 2021, we will pay nearly $1 trillion a year solely to service the debt. One trillion.

That's nearly $19 billion a week or $2.7 billion a day. Two point seven billion dollars a day just to pay the interest. That is utterly unsustainable.

And money that goes to paying off the interest, let alone the principle, on the debt is money that will not be invested in road construction, or cancer research, or homeland security, or math and science education.

Over four years ago I came to the House floor to propose an independent bipartisan commission to address unsustainable federal spending. It would put everything on the table--entitlements, all other spending and tax policy. The SAFE Commission--short for Securing America's Future Economy--would operate in an authentic and transparent way, holding a series of public meetings across the country to hear from the American people. The commission would send its recommendations for a way forward to a sustainable economy to Congress, which would be required to vote up or down.

Senator George Voinovich, who is retiring this year and who has been a champion of fiscal integrity throughout his career in public service, was my partner in the Senate as sponsor of the SAFE bill. Congressman Jim Cooper and I also teamed in the 110th and this Congress to push the SAFE bill, garnering 118 cosponsors. Joining the effort in the Senate with Senator Voinovich were Senators Lieberman, Conrad and Gregg.

Senators Conrad and Gregg introduced a similar bill calling for a deficit commission that became the blueprint for the President's National Commission on Fiscal Responsibility and Reform and on which both senators served. On December 3, a bipartisan majority of 11 of the 18 commission members voted to recommend a bold plan to Congress that

would address our Nation's fiscal imbalance by cutting $4 trillion from the federal budget over the next decade. I commend Senators Coburn, Conrad, Crapo, Durbin, Gregg, and Representative Spratt for voting to advance the proposal. They recognize the seriousness of our fiscal situation and that the Congress needs to develop a plan for action.

The leaders of the bipartisan fiscal commission, Erskine Bowles and former Senator Alan Simpson, wrote to the president and leaders of Congress:

``Our growing national debt poses a dire threat to this Nation's future. Ever since the economic downturn, Americans have had to make tough choices about how to make ends meet. Now it's time for leaders in Washington to do the same.''

Yet today, we see that once again, Washington is punting. Less than 80 hours after the commission's 11 to 7 bipartisan vote, ``this compromise'' was unveiled at a cost of nearly $1 trillion in borrowed money. The commission's chairmen told us that ``the era of debt denial is over.'' Yet the legislation before us today clearly demonstrates that that is simply not the case.

To quote Senator Coburn's floor statement of December 8:

``What we need to do, Democrats and Republicans and our Independent colleagues, is recognize the depth and magnitude of our problem right now. There needs to be a great big time out. Who cares who is in charge if there is no country to run that can be salvaged? It doesn't matter.

``Economists worldwide and some of the brightest people at Harvard and MIT, the University of Texas, Pennsylvania, they don't sleep at night right now. They know we are on the razor-thin edge of falling over a cliff.

``The fact is, both parties have laid a trap for future generations by our inaction, our laziness, our arrogance, and a crass desire for power. We are waterboarding the next generation with debt. We are drowning them in obligations because we don't have the courage to come together and address or even debate a real solution. . . . The problem is so big and so urgent and so necessary that we ought to have [a] debate. We ought to make sure the American people know the significance of the problems facing us.''

I couldn't agree more.

On Monday, Moody's Investment Service warned that this legislation jeopardizes America's coveted AAA credit rating, and could lead to a negative outlook in as little as two years. For the record, I am inserting its report.

If our credit rating is downgraded, the cost to borrow money will rise.

Everything, from a home loan to a car loan to tuition for college to a credit card bill to interest payments on the debt, will increase. We will be paying more to sustain, not to improve, our existing quality of life.

We need look no farther than Europe to see the destructive impact that results after a nation's financial crisis. There have been riots in Belgium, Spain, France, Ireland, England, Italy, and Latvia. Just Monday, Moody's threatened to further downgrade Spain's credit ratings. Will there be rioting in the streets here like we are now seeing abroad?

This House, and the Senate before us, is continuing on its profligate ways of adding billions of dollars to the nation's credit card, which has been issued by the banks of China and Saudi Arabia, among others.

More than 46 percent of the U.S. debt held by the public is in foreign hands. Saudi Arabia was home to the 9/11 terrorists. Saudi Arabia's Wahhabi brand of Islam is taught in some of the most radical mosques and madrassas around the world, including along the Pakistan/ Afghanistan border. Saudi Arabia represses women and persecutes Christians and Jews.

Their textbooks are filled with hateful messages about minority faiths. Just last month a BBC expose' reveled that Saudi textbooks used for weekend education programs to teach about 5,000 Muslim children in Britain, contained claims that ``some Jews were transformed into pigs and apes . . .'' Further, the books, which again are Saudi national curriculum, contain ``text and pictures showing the correct way to chop off the hands and feet of thieves.'' Is this a country we want to be beholden to?

Or what about communist China, our largest banker, which routinely violates the basic human rights and religious freedom of its own people where Catholic bishops, Protestant ministers and Tibetan monks are jailed for practicing their faith? I've seen how they plundered Tibet with my own eyes. China was once again in the spotlight recently when famed dissident Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace prize. China's response? Place Liu's wife under house arrest, stop other dissidents from attending the award ceremony in Oslo and place them under tight surveillance, and indefinitely postpone trade talks with Norway.

The U.S. intelligence community notes that China's attempts to penetrate U.S. agencies are the most aggressive of all foreign intelligence organizations. According to the FBI, Chinese intelligence services ``pose a significant threat both to the national security and to the compromise of U.S. critical national assets.'' Weapons that entities of the People's Republic of China supplied to Iran were ``found to have been transferred to terrorist organizations in Iraq and Afghanistan.'' China is a significant arms supplier and source of economic strength to the genocidal regime in Sudan. Do we really want China to be our banker?

In a February 2010 piece, Wall Street Journal columnist Gerald Seib wrote, ``the Federal budget deficit has long since graduated from nuisance to headache to pressing national concern. Now, however, it has become so large and persistent that it is time to start thinking of it as something else entirely: A national security threat.''

These foreign countries, with vastly different aims than our own, could end up negatively influencing U.S. foreign policy by threatening to dump our currency in the world market. Such actions would not be a historical anomaly.

Recall 1956 in the Suez Canal crisis, which some believed signaled the end of Britain and France as world powers. Egypt announced that it was going to nationalize the canal, which outraged the British and French, who then devised a plan to use military force to keep control. The U.S. wanted to avert conflict at any cost. And President Eisenhower threatened to sell the U.S. reserves of the British pound, which would essentially result in the collapse of the British currency. The British changed course, demonstrating the power, the impact, that economic manipulation can have on foreign policy.

Is it conceivable to imagine the Saudis threatening to dump our currency if we don't withdraw from the region? Is it conceivable to imagine China threatening to dump our currency if we don't stop pressing nuclear-armed North Korea?

Simply put, we are presently borrowing hundreds of billions of dollars from countries which pursue aims that are at odds with our national interest and values, both directly and indirectly.

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has pointed to our nation's debt as a national security risk. It is expected that, as early as 2014, our nation will spend more on interest payments than was spent on the 2010 defense budget. In case you missed that, we will pay more to borrow money than we will pay to defend our freedom.

This is a package full of numerous perks to sweeten the deal. As the Wall Street Journal editorial, ``The Hawkeye Handouts,'' noted on December 13, Republicans ``should worry that the tax bill is turning into a special interest spectacle. The bill revives a $1 a gallon biodiesel tax credit at a cost of nearly $2 billion, and there's $202 million for `incentives for alternative fuel,' $331 million for a 50% tax credit for maintaining railroad tracks, and so on. These credits are a form of special interest spending via the tax code, which is precisely the business as usual behavior that Republicans told tea party voters they wouldn't engage in.''

Dan Eggen of the Washington Post reported yesterday that ``. . . the ethanol provision . . . has cost taxpayers more than $21 billion since 2006. The Government Accountability Office recently concluded that the credit has had little impact in encouraging ethanol use or production, especially since the government already mandates rising levels of ethanol in gasoline and protects the corn ethanol industry through tariffs.''

From farmers producing ethanol to Puerto Ricans making rum to film producers in Hollywood, there's something for everyone. Even worse, the payroll tax holiday raids, for the first time in our history, the Social Security trust fund, which is already going broke. No one comes away empty handed.

This is, as Charles Krauthammer wrote in the Washington Post on December 10, nothing more than a stimulus by another name--an unfunded stimulus that costs considerably more than the President's stimulus of 2009 that so many on my side of the aisle opposed.

Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, hit the nail on the head in an October 2009 National Journal article when she said, ``It's like fiscal jenga, where people are piling on more and more debt, and finally, something's going to be the cause of it collapsing, but no one believes their thing is going to be the tipping point.''

This package could be the ``thing'' that takes us closer to the tipping point.

Candidly, I have never been more concerned about our country's future. We see a nation whose young people are lagging behind their peers globally. We see a Senate debating a $1.1 trillion omnibus spending measure containing over 6,000 earmarks representing over $8 billion worth of spending. We see a Congress and a president embracing a tax package that risks our nation's highly valued AAA bond rating. All the while we see young

men and women in uniform, in distant places like Afghanistan and Iraq, modeling the sort of sacrifice that few Americans even expect from their elected leaders any more.

Only through shared sacrifice can we hope to walk back from the precipice. But instead of asking for sacrifice, the measure before us today provides something for everyone. Maybe not as much as everyone wanted, but what was truly sacrificed? The word compromise implies that both sides in the negotiation give up something. No one gave up anything. Legislation of this magnitude must be balanced by reforms.

But instead of reforms we see recklessness. This legislation walks us further down the path to greater and greater deficits and debt that can only lead to a place none of us wants to go--a bankrupt America. I cannot in good conscience leave that type of country to my children and grandchildren.

At his 1796 farewell address, George Washington admonished his fellow countrymen: ``We should avoid ungenerously throwing upon posterity the burden of which we ourselves ought to bear.''

Enough is enough. I vote ``no.''

[From Moody's Weekly Credit Outlook, Dec. 13, 2010]

US Tax Package Is Negative for US Credit, but Positive for Economic

Growth

If the tax and unemployment-benefit package agreed to on 6

December by President Obama and congressional Republican

leaders becomes law, it will boost economic growth in the

next two years, but adversely affect the federal government

budget deficit and debt level. From a credit perspective, the

negative effects on government finance are likely to outweigh

the positive effects of higher economic growth. Unless there

are offsetting measures, the package will be credit negative

for the US and increase the likelihood of a negative outlook

on the US government's Aaa rating during the next two years

One motivation for the two-year extension of the current

personal income tax rates (put in place in 2001 and 2003 and

referred to as the ``Bush tax cuts'') is to prevent a setback

to economic and employment growth that would result from

higher taxes beginning on 1 January, the expiration date of

the earlier tax cuts. Keeping the existing tax rates would

not provide an impetus to growth, but raising them would have

a negative effect. However, the package also includes, among

other things, an extension of unemployment benefits for the

long-term unemployed through 2011 and a two-percentage-point

cut in the Social Security payroll tax. The latter two

measures will give a boost to economic and employment growth

in the coming two years, with some forecasters significantly

raising their GDP growth numbers in 2011 and 2012.

Higher economic growth should have a positive effect on

government revenues and reduce payments related to

unemployment. However, the magnitude of this positive effect

will be considerably less than the foregone revenue and

increased benefit expenditure, resulting in substantially

higher budget deficits than would have otherwise been the

case. The Congressional Budget Office's most recent estimate

of the deficit for fiscal year 2011 was $1.1 trillion, or 7%

of GDP, assuming no expiration of the tax cuts, and $665

billion (4.2%) in fiscal year 2012. These deficits would

raise the ratio of government debt to GDP to 68.5% by the end

of fiscal year 2012, compared with 61.6% two years earlier.

The net cost of the proposed package of tax-cut extensions,

payroll-tax reductions, unemployment benefits, and some other

measures may be $700-$900 billion, raising the debt ratio to

72%-73%, depending on the effects on nominal economic growth.

The government's ratio of debt to revenue, instead of

declining rather steeply over the two years from about 420%

at the end of fiscal year 2010, would decline considerably

less to somewhere just under 400%. This is a very high ratio

compared with both history and other highly rated sovereigns.

Thus, while higher growth and lower unemployment are

clearly good for the economy, the package is negative for US

government debt metrics. In addition, there is a risk that

the two-year extension may be renewed at the end of 2012,

given that that period coincides with a presidential

election. A permanent extension of the tax cuts alone

(without other measures) could result in a considerable

increase in deficits and debt levels unless other measures to

reduce deficits are adopted. The exhibit below illustrates

that the fiscal balance in the coming decade would be

considerably higher under such a scenario, all other things

being equal, and this would result in a worsening of the

government's debt position. A package of options put forth by

the fiscal commission at the beginning of this month provides

a menu of such measures that would reverse these trends, but

their adoption remains uncertain.

Madam Speaker, I submit for the Record a letter I received from the Chaldean Assyrian Syriac Council of America regarding the plight of Iraq's ancient Christian community, which is increasingly under assault and facing near extinction from the lands they have inhabited for centuries. The Wall Street Journal just yesterday noted on its editorial page that ``some still speak the Aramaic, the ancient language of Jesus Christ.''

The Journal further noted that of ``the 100,000 Christians who once lived in Mosul, Iraq, only some 5,000 are still there.''

While the situation in Iraq is perhaps the most glaring, it is but representative of a larger trend in the Middle East where religious minorities face growing discrimination, repression and outright persecution. The Journal continued, ``In Egypt, Coptic Christians have been brutalized. Assaults on churches increase around Easter or Christmas, as worshipers attempt to observe holy days.''

During this season of Advent as millions around the world anticipate Christmas, let us be mindful of the fear gripping these communities and commit ourselves to prioritizing their protection and preservation throughout the Middle East. We have a moral obligation to do nothing less. For as the famed abolitionist William Wilberforce once said, ``Having heard all this, you may choose to look the other way, but you can never again say that you did not know.''

I close with the solemn warning of the Chaldean Assyrian Syriac Council of America to President Obama, in a letter sent this November, in which they noted that the current situation in Iraq ``promises more innocent Christian blood in Iraq, more turmoil in that country, and more shame for America.''

Chaldean Assyrian Syriac Council

of America,

Southfield, MI, December 6, 2010.

Congressman Frank Wolf,

House of Representatives, Cannon Building, Washington, DC.

Dear Congressman Wolf: We are witnessing a tragic and

historic event: The end of Iraq's native Christian community.

And, even more tragically, this has happened due in part

because of failed U.S. Policy, with the majority of

congressional members taking little or no notice of the

destruction of an ethnic and religious identity few know

about.

The Christians of Iraq are also known as Assyrians,

Chaldeans, Syriacs or Arameans (or even ChaldoAssyrians or

Chaldean Syriac Assyrians). They are the heirs of the ancient

and pre-Christian civilization of Mesopotamia, the descents

of the Assyrians and Babylonians of old. They are also the

descents of the first Semitic-speaking Christians, whose

churches spanned the entire Middle East and reached China and

Japan. At one time, what is today known as the Assyrian

Church of the East had more adherents than the Catholic and

Protestant Churches combined. Their language is Aramaic, the

language of Jesus Christ.

Mesopotamia holds a special place in Biblical history. It

is the land from which Abraham left his home, `Ur of the

Chaldees;' where the Hebrew people lived their captivity and

survived into the modern era; where the fall of Nineveh was

foreseen by the Prophet Nahum, whose grave lies in Alqush, in

Nineveh, the ancient capital of Assyria visited by the

Prophet Jonah; where Nebuchadnezzar rebuilt the glorious

Babylon where the Prophet Daniel lived.

During the Abbasid Caliphate in Baghdad (758-1258 AD),

Mesopotamia's Christians contributed greatly to the

advancement of Islamic civilization through their literary

and scientific accomplishments, including the translations of

important Greek works into Syriac (Aramaic) and Arabic. It

was through such accomplishments that the West came to know

of the ``Golden Age'' of Islamic civilization and the

Caliphate of Baghdad. Indeed, the very existence of the

``House of Wisdom,'' an institution dedicated to the

translation and documentation of all knowledge on philosophy,

mathematics, astronomy, and other sciences into Arabic at the

time owes itself to the Christians of Iraq.

As a result of the turbulence caused by a pattern of

religious persecution and ethnic intolerance, the Christians

of Iraq maintained themselves in the area of northern

Mesopotamia or Assyria, also known as the Nineveh Plain.

Here, and in the surrounding areas, they maintained their

religious and ethnic identity and lived in hundreds of

villages that dotted the landscape around the Tigris River

until the coming modernity, at which time they suffered

massacres and genocides at the hands of the Ottomans and

their supporters. The First World War saw the uprooting and

destruction of hundreds of Aramaic-speaking Christian

villages in what is today Southeastern Turkey, Northwestern

Iran, and Northern Iraq. Still, the Christian population

survived, with its ethnic and religious identity intact.

The formation of the Kingdom Iraq resulted in further

tragedy for Christians, with the most infamous being the

Semele Massacre; where thousands of women, children, and

unarmed men were slaughtered in cold blood, after being given

assurances of protection by the Iraqi government. Crowds in

Baghdad streets jubilantly welcomed Iraqi soldiers in what

may be one of the most shameful displays in Iraqi history.

Despite the tragedies, the Christian population recovered

and helped usher in an age of education and enlightenment for

Iraq. Christians made up the most prominent doctors,

engineers and scientists in Iraq. As any knowledgeable Iraqi

would attest, they constituted, as a group, the most valuable

human asset Iraq had. And despite the regime of Saddam

Hussein, though politically repressed, Christians excelled in

business and science.

Today, this minority may not be so lucky. The massacre that

took place in the Lady of Salvation Church on Sunday, October

31, 2010, and the subsequent targeted killings afterwards,

has many Christian leaders speaking of leaving Iraq for good.

Recently, Archbishop Athanasios Dawood of the Syriac Orthodox

Church is saying. ``I say clearly and now--the Christian

people should leave their beloved land of our ancestors and

escape the premeditated ethnic cleansing,'' he told BBC.

``This is better than having them killed one by one.''

Scholars Eden Naby and Jamsheed Chosky recently wrote in

Foreign Policy that the end of Christianity in Iraq is near.

In a letter to President Obama, the Chaldean Assyrian Syriac

Council of America, an organization serving this community in

the United States, noted that the current situation

``promises more innocent Christian blood in Iraq, more

turmoil in that country, and more shame for America.''

As members of the world community, and as Americans, we

bear a responsibility not to allow the disintegration and

destruction of this community. Clearly, our entry into Iraq

has caused consequences that we cannot walk away from.

Iraq's Christians have a unique heritage whose loss will be

mourned by not only Iraq, but the United States and the

World. Some have proposed a wholesale evacuation of this

community in order to save it. Yet, there are other viable

options; such as the recognition of an autonomous zone to be

protected and monitored by the United Nations and the United

States. It is time to consider the plight of this community

seriously and propose action.

Regards,

Ismat Karmo,

Chairman.

I thank the gentleman, and I want to thank Mr. Lewis for his service, too.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition. Everyone should know that in this continuing resolution there is the expansion of Indian gambling. There is the expansion of Indian gambling. And probably nobody in this institution, bar one or two people on the Appropriations Committee, has even read the bill.

This overturns a Supreme Court decision. Do you all know on my side and that side, this overturns a Supreme Court decision?

Has anyone remembered Abramoff and corruption and problems that have come about with regard to that? How did such an erroneous provision, how did expansion get in? No markup. No markup by the Natural Resources Committee. The election just said the American people want to know that we have read the bill. Nobody's read this bill, and now this is slipped in. And I don't know who has slipped it in. But, quite frankly----

Yes, sir, I would like an answer.

I don't care if it's a Republican amendment or a Democratic amendment, it is a bad amendment, and it will bring about major expansion of gambling.

I reclaim my time.

There have been no hearings. The Department of the Interior has refused to answer a written request from Members of Congress to identify which tribes. So nobody knows what tribes. Nobody knows what tribes. Nobody knows anything in this institution when it comes to this.

The Department of the Interior has refused to answer. There is no consultation with the States. This bill is almost a repeat, a repeat of how this Congress and this city and this country got in trouble with the Abramoff thing. This is scandalous.

This provision--I don't care if it's a Republican amendment or a Democratic amendment; it is a bad amendment. It will bring about crime, corruption. It attacks on the poor, and it is a bad amendment. And because of all the great reasons that Mr. Lewis said and others said why it's a bad bill, this is another good reason. This bill should be defeated. Because when you vote for this bill, you are voting for expansion of gambling all over this country.

It's not scurrilous. This will bring a major expansion of gambling. And I don't care what subcommittee.

I will venture, had the average Member come down here and been told tomorrow that they voted for a major expansion of gambling, they would not have known. It ought not to be on the CR bill.

It is a bad bill. It is a bad idea. It brings about crime and corruption and attacks on the poor, and I urge the defeat of this CR.

I want to thank my good friend and distinguished colleague Congressman Chris Smith of New Jersey for introducing this important resolution which congratulates Chinese democracy advocate Liu Xiaobo on the award.

Congressman Smith--and I think all the colleagues in this House on both sides should know--is one of the greatest human rights advocates in the Congress, and his leadership on this issue and on human rights and religious freedom is really, I think, one of the finest that I have ever served with since I have been here in Congress. I also want to say parenthetically, why hasn't the Church in the West and in the United States also spoken out on some of these more profound issues of human rights and religious freedoms? The silence of the Church in the West is quite disturbing.

On Friday, the award ceremony will be held with an empty chair, as my colleague Mr. Wu said, as a solemn reminder that this year's Nobel laureate remains languishing in prison. Chinese authorities have placed his wife under house arrest to ensure that she will not be able to accept the prize on his behalf.

Since 1901, only three other Nobel Prize winners have been prevented from attending the ceremony to accept the prize. In 1935, Carl von Ossietzy, a German peace activist, was prevented from receiving the prize by the Nazi government. In 1975, Andrei Sakharov, a Russian nuclear scientist, was barred from leaving the Soviet Union to accept the prize. And in 1991, Aung San Suu Kyi, the leader of Burma's democracy movement, was not allowed to leave the country by the brutal ruling military junta.

China should be ashamed and embarrassed to be in the company of Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, and Burma. Instead, the Chinese Government has launched a diplomatic campaign to encourage other nations to boycott Friday's ceremony. In a public statement, China's vice foreign minister threatened that ``if they make the wrong choice, they have to bear the consequences.'' The 18 countries that have sided with China and will not attend Friday's ceremonies are Afghanistan, Colombia, Egypt, Russia, Kazakhstan, Cuba, Morocco, Iraq, Iran, Pakistan, the Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Sudan--the genocide Government of Sudan--Tunisia, Ukraine, Venezuela, and Vietnam.

And when their lobbyists come up here next year begging for help, remember, they were not willing to go to Oslo even to stand up for human rights. Here we are giving the Moroccan Government $697 million in the Millennium Challenge grant, and they won't even go to Oslo. These countries, which are among the world's worst human rights abusers, will join China in its shameful boycott.

This year's Nobel Prize winner is representative not just of Dr. Liu, but of the thousands of Chinese prisoners that remain languishing in prisons and labor camps due to their political and religious beliefs. Chinese authorities continue to crack down on the Protestant house church Christians, Catholics, Tibetan Buddhists, Muslim Uyghurs, and members of the Falun Gong.

In passing this resolution, the U.S. Congress sends an important message to the dissidents of China and all those who are being persecuted around the world. The people of the United States stand with those who sit in their jail cells day after day, week after week, year after year in their quest for freedom.

Robert F. Kennedy once said: ``Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope'' and ``those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.''

The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Dr. Liu has sent out that ripple of hope that cannot be stopped. And I believe that in my lifetime--and remember, the Berlin Wall fell like that--in my lifetime, the Chinese people will know the true freedom, and I will look forward to celebrating that day.

I thank Mr. Smith again for his leadership on this and so many other issues.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res. 323 and thank the gentleman for yielding.

I believe we have a moral obligation to ensure that all members of our society are able to age with grace and dignity and to speak out, to speak out if we notice that a particular group within our society is facing unique barriers toward this goal.

As many have noted earlier, there are approximately 127,000 Holocaust survivors living in the United States today. Despite being victims of unfathomable crimes, and crimes that unfortunately the world stood by and looked the other way for years and years and years, these individuals immigrated and assimilated into the United States to become valuable members and contributors to our society.

Nursing homes and assisted care settings provide many of my constituents with an invaluable service and caring homes. However, we are noticing that a disproportionate number of Holocaust survivors, many of whom are now in their eighties and nineties, are not able to easily transition to these facilities.

This is specifically due to their horrific past experiences. Just remember the movie, Schindler's List. Many facilities simply do not have the additional resources that would be necessary to care for most of these survivors.

Given this challenge, it is important we work to raise awareness of existing opportunities to minimize this emerging situation. Many Holocaust survivors and the nonprofit organizations and agencies that work with them daily have found that aging-in-place programs help to alleviate this problem.

I urge that the administration, the Department of Health and Human Services, in partnership with the Administration on Aging, and nonprofit groups, work with the Holocaust survivors to address their needs through existing programs and also to work on developing innovative and efficient solutions to address this challenge.

I am pleased to work again with my colleague from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz), to introduce this resolution to highlight this issue. Again, as I said, for the longest time in the thirties and forties, the world looked the other way.

Just go to the Holocaust Museum and see many times people were crying out and the word was coming out of Germany and yet people looked the other way.

So I strongly urge support of this and I hope when it's voted on, if there is a roll call vote, it will be a unanimous vote.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise today in support of H.R. 5877, to designate the facility of the United

States Postal Service located at 655 Centre Street in Jamaica Plain, Massachusetts, as the ``Lance Corporal Alexander Scott Arredondo, United States Marine Corps Post Office Building.''

Madam Speaker, it is altogether fitting and proper that we name this post office in Jamaica Plain for a true American hero who made the ultimate sacrifice for our country.

Born August 5, 1984, Alexander Scott Arredondo graduated from Blue Hills Regional Technical School in Canton, Massachusetts, in the year 2002. He joined the Marine Corps and was assigned to the 1 Marine Expeditionary Force based out of Camp Pendleton, California. He was deployed to Iraq and served his first tour of duty in 2003, which lasted 9 months. In June, 2004, Lance Corporal Arredondo was deployed back to Iraq. Sadly, Madam Speaker, Lance Corporal Arredondo died in Najaf, Iraq, defending freedom and protecting our Nation.

At only 20 years old, Lance Corporal Arredondo was on his second tour of duty supporting Operation Iraqi Freedom, proving this young man's bravery, courage, and dedication. He is truly an American hero, and I urge all Members to join us in support of this bill.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise today in support of H. Res. 771, supporting the goals and ideals of a National Mesothelioma Awareness Day. It is a terrible disease, form of cancer, debilitating ailment that is terminal. Madam Speaker, many all over the world have suffered and died from this disease, including a former Member of this body.

Bruce F. Vento, a Member who I served with for 19 years died of mesothelioma in the year 2000. He represented Minnesota's Fourth District for 12 terms until his death. I still remember the last time I spoke to Mr. Vento. He was in the back rail there close to the Democratic Cloakroom.

So I strongly support and thank the gentleman and gentlelady from Minnesota for offering this and urge all Members to support it.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I introduced this legislation to commemorate the life of my constituent, the late Army Colonel George Juskalian, by dedicating the post office of Centreville, Virginia, as the ``Colonel George Juskalian Post Office Building.''

The colonel was born in Fitchburg, Massachusetts. He passed away this past July 4 at the age of 96, and he served our Nation for nearly 30 years on active duty, including campaigns in World War II, Korea, and Vietnam.

He joined the United States Army in 1939 and was called to active duty as a first lieutenant in 1940 and served with distinction in World War II. During this time, he was captured by the Germans in Tunisia and spent 27 months in prisoner of war camps in Italy, Germany, and Poland.

Colonel Juskalian was in General Eisenhower's secretariat in the Pentagon between 1945 and 1948, and was an adviser to the Imperial Iranian Army in Tehran. He also served our Nation with distinction in France and on the home front, retiring with the rank of colonel in 1967. Awards he received include the Army's highest award, the Legion of Merit, for noncombat service, as well as the Silver Star, the Bronze Star, the Army Commendation Medal, the Air Medal, and the Parachutist Badge, and the combat Infantry Badge with a Star awarded for World War II and the Korean War.

He learned the value of community service at an early age from his parents, who were at the forefront of Armenians immigrating to this country and who worked to establish the Armenian Church in the United States.

The colonel was a longtime resident of Centreville and remained actively involved in his community until his death through organizations such as the Armenian Assembly of America, American Legion Post 1995, and the Blue and Gray Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 8469. Many knew the colonel through his volunteer work at local schools.

I want to thank each Member of the Virginia delegation as they joined with me to introduce this bill. I also want to thank the gentleman from New York (Mr. Towns) and the gentleman from California (Mr. Issa) for working with me to bring this legislation to the floor for consideration.

Naming the Centreville, Virginia, post office facility after Colonel George Juskalian will be a fitting tribute to his many, many years of service, and will also serve as a constant reminder of the sacrifices made by members of the United States Armed Services.

I urge a ``yes'' vote.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I would say, as the gentleman and I were talking, I did support the motion to recommit and I thought there were many, many good ideas in it. This bill, though, where we are today I think is a good bill for the country.

As someone who has worked on this issue for more than 18 years, I think it is good legislation. There is nothing magic about strapping yourself into a metal box and driving 50 miles and sitting at a metal desk, because that's not necessarily the way that we do things in the 21st century.

This bill saves money. It's important for Members to know that this bill saves money. This bill reduces the footprint of the government. This bill is deficit neutral and strengthens the continuation of operations plan in the event of a disaster such as a hurricane, like Katrina, or the massive snowstorm, as was previously mentioned, or in the event of an earthquake such as the Loma Prieta, the 1989 World Series earthquake, or in the event of a terrorist attack.

I was here on 9/11. The Pentagon was hit. Cell phones did not work. Nothing worked. The government was fundamentally shut down. If we had had more people teleworking, we would have had the continuity and have been better able to function, particularly during that dark day of the enemy attack.

During the February snowstorm, this bill saved money.

This legislation adopts many of the best management practices that many companies, most companies now in the private sector are using. Almost every major company in the private sector has telework. And when you say you want the government to be more like the private sector, this is the answer.

Lastly, Madam Speaker, every Member, or maybe almost every Member of this institution teleworks when they pick up their BlackBerry or their iPhone. To say that you have to be sitting at your desk office computer to be doing your work is just not accurate. That's like saying every Member is not working if they're not in their office sitting at their laptop. That doesn't make any sense.

This brings the government into the 21st century, and I urge strong support of this.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the tireless efforts of the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Sarbanes, and was pleased to work with him to author this legislation. I also thank the gentleman from New York, Mr. Towns, and the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr. Lynch, for their work to advance this legislation, as well as our colleagues in the Senate who worked on the text of what we are considering today, including Senators Akaka, Voinovich, Lieberman, Collins, and Coburn.

This is good, bipartisan legislation, which was also strengthened in the House through the work of my colleague from Virginia, Mr. Wittman, and my colleague from West Virginia, Mrs. Capito.

My colleagues will detail why this legislation is important, that it is deficit neutral, that it strengthens our COOP, Continuation of Operations Plans, in the event of disasters such as a hurricane, like Katrina, or a massive snowstorm, like what occurred this past February, or in the event of an earthquake, such as the Loma Prieta, the World Series earthquake, or in the event of a terrorist attack. In all these instances, telework was vital in ensuring that our government continued to operate.

In their song The Boxer, Simon and Garfunkel said that ``man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.'' That, unfortunately, has been the case with this legislation.

Despite what you may hear, this is good legislation. Telework is good government policy.

This legislation is about doing more with less. Let me repeat-- telework is about doing more with less. It is about adapting best practice procedures from the private sector that companies, such as IMB, use daily. It is about saving money. It is about reducing the size, the footprint, of the Federal Government. It is about forcing the Federal Government into the 21st century workplace.

During the February snowstorm, telework allowed the Federal Government to recoup the $30 million a day for each day that the government was shut down. Imagine how much would have been saved if more people were teleworking?

It was through my work with members, such as the gentleman from Maryland, Mr. Hoyer, that we forced the government to recognize the benefits of telework. When I was chairman of the Science-State-Justice and Commerce Appropriations Subcommittee, I inserted the language to mandate that agencies increase telework opportunities for eligible employees.

Why? Because agencies weren't following our directives, our intent. The intent of the Congress to make the government more efficient. And this is what is happening now--telework isn't being used to its fullest extent. And maybe that's because of a lack of information, or reluctant management, or a combination of both. This legislation will not fix all the problems that exist. But it will go a long way toward improvement.

Work is something you do, not someplace you go. There is no magic to strapping yourself in a metal box and driving, sometimes up to an hour and a half to our workplaces, and sitting in front of our computers all day.

Information accessed at workplaces can just as easily be accessed from computers in our living rooms. With the American family under attack, telework provides the opportunities for parents to spend more time with their families, and everyone to enjoy things they like to do.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on the Telework Enhancement Act of 2010.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize the important work of the Upper Loudoun Youth Football League (ULYFL) in collecting nonperishable food donations for the Tree of Life Food Pantry in Purcellville, Virginia.

This fall the Upper Loudoun Youth Football League partnered with Tree of Life Food Pantry to collect food for the individuals and families in the community and stock the food pantry's shelves for the upcoming winter season. The league divided into 25 teams and worked to collect nonperishable food donations. Team Chargers led the pack and collected 3,532 pounds of food and 54 boxes of cereal, and Team Bucs followed close behind with 3,459 pounds of food and 142 boxes of cereal. The other teams included: The Titans/D Cowboys; Bulldogs/Huskies/Vikings; Team Mustangs; Team Oarsman; Team Packers; Team Bengals; Team Giants; The Gators/D Giants; The Tigers/D Ravens; Team Warriors; Team Trojan; The Raiders/D Redskins; The Eagles/ Flag Bengals; Team Vikings; The Wildcats/ Flag Panthers;Team Knights; Team Colts; Team Huskies; Team Aztecs; Team Seahawks; The Cougars/ Flag Pacers; Team Cheerleaders; and The Bandits/D Eagles. All together the league collected 23,550 pounds of food and 614 boxes of cereal.

I commend all who volunteered for their tireless commitment and service to those in their community who are unable to make ends meet and put food on the table. I also commend the partnership that has grown between the Upper Loudoun Youth Football League and the Tree of Life Food Pantry in Purcellville to make available leftover food to stock the shelves of the food pantry.

In closing, I would like to thank the coaches, the league, the parents, and the players for their dedicated efforts and support for the community.