Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise to congratulate Arianna McQuillen, of Fairfax Station, on her selection as a Buick and General Motors Foundation Scholarship Recipient. She has been identified as one of 100 outstanding students from across the United States to receive up to $25,000 in a renewable scholarship. She plans to attend Massachusetts Institute of Technology and specialize in robotics.

Arianna is very involved in our community, working on projects such as cleaning the Occoquan watershed, planting trees, preparing care packages for soldiers abroad and tutoring young students.

Her academic record is proof that she is a high-achieving student. She studied at Lake Braddock Secondary School, where her interests varied from math and science to art and the environment. She has won many awards in areas ranging from debate to art. She is a National Merit Scholar, a 2010 Beat the Odds Scholarship Recipient, an Advanced Placement Scholar, and a National Achievement Semi-Finalist.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Arianna McQuillen's remarkable achievements and wishing her continued success as she pursues her degree at MIT.

Mr. Speaker, America needs jobs, and it's time we focused on proven policies rather than political rhetoric and posturing.

We need a real jobs program that builds on actual successes. The President tonight will be putting forward his job creation proposal. Unfortunately, some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle have already decided that they are not even going to come and respect the President's joint appearance tonight. Talk about closed minds.

According to reports, he will call for infrastructure investments and middle class tax relief through an extension of the payroll tax cut, policies we know can create jobs. I look forward to working with the President and those who are willing to work with us on the other side to jump-start our economy and create American jobs.

To that end, I have introduced two bills to incentivize private sector job creation. They include tax cuts and private sector tax incentives, ideas that work, ideas that Republicans traditionally have supported.

I introduced H.R. 11 to extend the successful Build America Bonds program to leverage private sector investment to facilitate needed infrastructure improvements. Repairing bridges, building hospitals, renovating schools create jobs now. During the last 2 years under the Build America Bonds program, for every Federal dollar we invested, we leveraged $41 of private sector support for more than 2,000 projects in every State and created hundreds of thousands of jobs. Build America Bonds is the kind of public-private partnership that Republicans generally support, and we know from the Recovery Act that they create jobs.

I have also introduced legislation to expand the tax deduction for business startups. Lending and venture capital investments in small businesses, especially startups, continue to lag significantly behind traditional levels. Extending this tax deduction for startup expenses gives entrepreneurs greater certainty for their financial planning and greater incentives to start creating jobs. These tax cuts and small business startups will enable the private sector to do what it does best--create jobs.

Make no mistake: The challenge is daunting. The Great Recession was the worst economic collapse in 80 years. At its height, America was losing 700,000 jobs a month; so Democrats in the last Congress took action. We passed the Recovery Act, which cut taxes for 95 percent of all Americans and increased infrastructure investment, saving and creating hundreds of thousands of construction jobs. We provided educational support to train a more highly skilled workforce. We enacted a hiring tax credit to spur private sector hiring of recently laid off workers, and we saw results. After months of horrific job losses, America began more than 1 year of monthly private sector net job growth, peaking earlier this year with 3 straight months of more than 200,000 private sector jobs created. In fact, in the last 18 months, we created 2.4 million private sector jobs. The public sector, however, has lost jobs every single month this year. Isn't this the result for which the Republicans actually advocated?

Didn't they tell us that cutting government will free up the private sector? Then why did we have just 17,000 private sector jobs created in August? In fact, the job results this August, with the Republican economic plan in action, continued cutting and zero net jobs created.

It's time we acknowledge that the Republican ``cut to create'' philosophy cuts the job market and creates only uncertainty. The choice is simple: Politics versus job creation. We're all going to be listening with great attention tonight to the President, and I hope all of us attend.

I thank the gentlelady, my good friend from New York.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I had no idea that my pending remarks would lead to such a wellspring of apparent support.

I would point out, Mr. Speaker, that in the last rejoinder between the gentleman from New Jersey and the gentleman from California, spending cuts at this level are not going to create any jobs. The idea that spending cuts and deficit reduction will lead to unprecedented economic prosperity is absolutely a false economic premise. Getting control of our fiscal house to make sure that we make productive investments and create jobs will create jobs.

With respect to the proposal underlying this rule, Mr. Speaker, there's plenty for members of both parties to find objectionable, and they might be right, but the choice before us is not that between this proposal and some platonic ideal. It is between this proposal and catastrophic default tomorrow.

Unlike the cynical bill this Chamber passed on a party-line vote last week, this bill commits America to meeting its obligations for the longer term, it leaves all options on the table, including revenue for the bipartisan committee this fall to further reduce the deficit, and having triggers, painful for both parties, adds real accountability and strict enforcement.

The American people understand we need a balance to restore fiscal responsibility and grow our economy. Recent GDP and manufacturing numbers are painful reminders, Mr. Speaker, of the fragility of our economy and its recovery, and the actions of House Republicans, sadly, have only exacerbated that by pulling back on key investments in infrastructure and innovation.

It's time to end the reckless game of chicken being waged here in this House. I commend President Obama and other leadership for leading the adult conversation to bring about this compromise. It is now time for us to do the responsible thing and bring to heel the wolf at the door.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Speaker, as the debate on avoiding a devastating default has progressed over the last several months, we've heard from many House Republicans that ``compromise'' is a dirty word. But the voices we should be listening to are

those of the American people. What they've said has been loud and clear. According to the NBC/Wall Street Journal poll, 53 percent of Independents and Republicans want Republican leaders to compromise. According to the ABC/Washington Post poll, 77 percent of all Americans think the Republican leadership has not been willing to compromise. According to the Quinnipiac University poll, 67 percent of Americans believe the debt ceiling compromise should be a balance between spending cuts and revenue--yes, revenue. According to the Gallup Poll, 57 percent of Republicans want a compromise plan--that's Republicans. And according to the CBS News poll, 78 percent of Republicans would rather have an agreement that they don't fully support than allow the country to default.

Mr. Speaker, it's long past time we started listening to the American people and reach a compromise to avoid a national default.

Madam Speaker, the bill proposed last night by the House Republicans set us up to fail and risk a catastrophic default. Today's gimmick is more of the same. But to win over the crowd calling for default, House Republican leadership would now make the disaster even more likely by including a constitutional amendment likely requiring a three-fifths vote to avoid any future default.

As our Republican colleagues sadly demonstrated yesterday, that threshold will be impossible to meet today and in the future. Their blind adherence to the demands of the default caucus stands in sharp contrast to the desire of most Americans who, according to every poll, are demanding a balanced compromise.

This bill is a blatant, cynical exercise in raw political muscle and nothing more. To the House Republicans bent on turning our Founding Fathers into deadbeat dads, I would respond using Speaker Boehner's own words from last year: Hell no, you can't.

Mr. Speaker, I've heard many of my Republican friends claim that providing the private sector with certainty and then getting out of its way is one of the ways Congress spurs economic recovery. Unfortunately, Speaker Boehner's plan does neither of those two things. It delays a catastrophic default only for a short time, keeping this crisis going before requiring the same charade in 6 months time.

If House Republicans are so unwilling to consider compromise today, if they eschew the bipartisan compromise that's proposed under Simpson Bowles, the Biden Group, and the bipartisan Gang of Six, why should the American people have any faith that when they come back in 6 months they will be more willing to compromise?

Where the Boehner plan fails, the Senate proposal provides economic certainty to the American economy through 2012, while protecting Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security from the drastic cuts the Boehner plan envisions. And according to the CBO, the Senate plan's $2.2 trillion in deficit reduction is more than double the Boehner plan of $915 billion.

The American people have spoken, Mr. Speaker, in poll after poll, on our phones, in our emails and at our offices. Get a bipartisan compromise now.

I thank the gentlelady.

Bond rating houses have already predicted that if we have a short- term fix to the debt ceiling here in the House today, we risk the downgrading of the creditworthiness of this country. Now, the GOP has proved itself fundamentally ill-suited to governance on this issue. They were for a big deal before they were against it, they were against a short-term fix before they were for it, and at least two walkouts from negotiations they asked for.

They can't accept a ``yes'' from the United States Senate getting what they wanted in the proposal: $2.2 trillion in cuts, no revenue, and a fix through 2012, providing the very certainty just in the last campaign cycle they preached about forever.

So why would they insist on this plan, a short-term fix that actually cuts less spending? Speaker Boehner said, ``to make sure the Democrats don't prevail in the Senate or at the White House.'' That simple. And that cynical.

It is no coincidence that the Republicans chose the clip from ``The Town.'' The topic has Ben Affleck talking about, ``We're going to harm some people.'' And his colleague jumps up and says, ``Whose car are we going to use?'' Reportedly, in the Republican caucus, somebody jumped up and said, ``I'll drive the car.''

I'm afraid that's true.

They're willing to drive the car to harm some people today. Though what they forgot to tell their caucus was that that scene is about a group of people plotting a crime. And that's what it will be today if we pass this seductively simple, short-term plan that will hurt America and hurt America's families.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Nancy Mercer and Jill Egle, co-executive directors of The Arc of Northern Virginia, for their tremendous work on behalf of the disabled in our community.

As my colleagues know, The Arc is a leading advocacy and service organization for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, serving more than 7,000 families in Northern Virginia alone. I am sad to share that after 5 years of collaboration, Nancy and Jill have decided to move on, but they have left The Arc stronger than ever.

Under Nancy and Jill's leadership, the local Arc staff, volunteers and community partners have been successful in promoting and protecting the rights of people of all abilities to live comfortably in the community. One of The Arc's primary missions is to provide full inclusion for intellectually and developmentally disabled individuals in all aspects of the community.

Through their combined efforts, The Arc has been expanded its advocacy efforts to become one of the strongest grassroots organizations in the Commonwealth. They spearheaded the formation of the Virginia Ability Alliance, creating a more unified voice for people with disabilities. Thanks to the compelling public awareness campaign, ``A Life Like Yours . . . Take a Walk in Our Shoes,'' Nancy and Jill helped hammer home the message that community support is essential for The Arc to succeed. With the resulting increase in community and financial support, The Arc has been able to help more people with disabilities live comfortably within our community.

Their voice also is being heard by state and national policy makers. The Arc of Northern Virginia helped lead a statewide campaign to eradicate use of the degrading ``R'' word in Virginia's State Code. They worked with community partners to launch a successful Get Out the Vote campaign that buoyed the participation rate of disabled voters in the 2008 Presidential election, and they recently have used their influence in the international arena to educate representatives from Russia, China, and Korea on the necessity of improving the rights of the disabled globally.

It has been my pleasure to work with both Nancy and Jill, and I have a personal relationship with each of them. As Chairman of the Fairfax Board of Supervisors, I always looked forward to Jill's expert testimony. She successfully raised the level of public discourse on the struggles of the developmentally disabled in Northern Virginia. Nancy's desire to better the lives of those affected by intellectual disability also has been inspiring. She will continue her mission this August as the President and CEO of the PHILLIPS program, an organization dedicated to furthering the lives of the developmentally disabled throughout the National Capital Region.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing the invaluable work of Nancy Mercer and Jill Egle to improve the lives of people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and wishing them continued success in their future pursuits. While their presence will be missed at The Arc, we are glad to know their influence will continue to be felt in our community.

I thank my colleague and my friend from Florida.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this rule, and I rise in opposition on substantive grounds. The Rules Committee approved for our consideration here on the floor every germane amendment but one, the Markey-Connolly amendment, which would have required a simple certification that the bulk of this oil to be transported by this proposed pipeline be for and designated for domestic consumption.

We hear a lot of rhetoric about the need to expand American production and/or access to secure oil to lessen our dependence on foreign suppliers. That,

indeed, is a noble goal. It's one in which I share, but not at any price, and I don't want to be sold a pig in a poke.

The fact that the Rules Committee would not put that amendment on this floor, going into content rather than procedure, finding it germane but still not allowing a fair debate and its consideration on this floor, I think gives the lie to the intent behind the extension of this pipeline.

This oil is not for domestic consumption; this oil is for foreign export. It has very little to do with domestic oil supply or it might have very little to do with domestic oil supply. A simple requirement that the preponderance of it be for domestic supply I think would have made prudent domestic policy and I think would have allowed a fair and interesting debate here on the floor of the House as to what the real intention of this pipeline is.

So I say to the American public, I urge you not to be fooled by propositions from the other side that this is going to be good for American consumers. This is going to be good for Chinese consumers.

Madam Chair, this bill is a charade. It purports to increase oil production in America, yet it would direct construction of a pipeline designed to export oil. There is already one Keystone pipeline from the tar sands of Alberta into America. That pipeline terminates in Oklahoma

and supplies America with oil derived from tar sands.

If the Republicans wanted to bring a bill to the floor that would increase domestic access to this oil, then it would support it. In fact, Mr. Markey and I introduced an amendment to ensure that oil from the Keystone pipeline would benefit American consumers, and it wasn't allowed on the floor. The Republican leadership wouldn't even let this amendment come for debate. They claim this pipeline will deliver oil to America but have used a backdoor procedural trick to block debate on it.

The amendment Mr. Markey and I introduced was the only germane amendment which was blocked by the Rules Committee. Why? Because it gives lie to the real intent of this bill: oil for export, not for domestic consumption. Our amendment met all of the parliamentary tests necessary to come to the floor and didn't increase spending. All it would have done was ensure that Keystone pipeline oil would flow to America rather than China, Cuba, or some other country. The fact that the Republicans blocked this simple amendment shows that the bill before us today isn't about energy security or gas prices but about oil company profits and exports.

It isn't surprising that leadership would put Big Oil profits ahead of consumers. This is the same caucus that is driving our Nation toward default while they refuse to close tax loopholes for oil companies.

This is the same Republican caucus that gutted the Clean Air and Clean Water Act earlier this week with three dozen policy riders in the Interior and Environment appropriations act; the same Republicans that slashed funding for the Commodities Futures Trading Commission, our cops on the beat to stop oil speculation; the same Republicans who opposed using the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to burst the speculative bubble in prices, that marches in lockstep with big oil companies since they took over the House majority; and today they're attempting to pass legislation that would take gas from America and send it overseas. We're being given a false proposition in this legislation, and I urge my colleagues to oppose it.

I yield to the gentleman from California.

I move to strike the last word.

Well, congratulations. This is probably the most radical anti-environment bill that the House of Representatives has ever considered. It cuts open space funding to the lowest level in a half a century. It opens the Grand Canyon to uranium mining. It denies the existence of climate change and eliminates funding for Federal agencies to monitor and adapt to it. It contains more than three dozen anti-environment policy riders that eviscerate the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, the National Environmental Policy Act, and other landmark environmental statutes.

The bill desecrates the legacy of Teddy Roosevelt and a long line of bipartisan conservation leaders while it also endangers public health.

The Republican majority claims to be concerned about spending, but this reckless bill will impose billions of dollars, Mr. Chairman, of health care costs on Americans by increasing the incidence of asthma, emphysema, heart attacks, and even premature death. This anti- environmental bill will increase health care costs by up to $539 billion according to the Congressional Research Service. Since Medicare, Medicaid, and CHIP are responsible for 33.9 percent of total health care costs,

this Republican bill will cost taxpayers some $179 billion more.

In addition, it will cause more than 60,000 premature deaths, 20 million lost days of work, and 36,800 additional heart attacks in America.

This bill eliminates funding for critical and conservation priorities, completely defunding the Forest Legacy program. It defunds the Chesapeake Bay Restoration program. It blocks Environmental Protection Agency implementation of public health standards for particulate, lead, greenhouse gas and other pollutants. It allows the unregulated destruction of one of America's two most biodiverse regions, southern Appalachia, by repealing Clean Water Act standards to protect streams from mountaintop removal.

It imperils the cleanliness of public drinking water by allowing unregulated disposal of coal, waste, and pesticides, and casts into regulatory purgatory developers and others seeking clarity of Clean Water Act regulations.

The Republican majority seems to be living in an alternative reality. As Americans face unprecedented drought in the Southwest, record floods in the Mississippi basin, record heat here in eastern and midwestern cities, accelerating sea level rises, and other symptoms of global warming, this bill blocks funding even to monitor global warming. Not only do the Republicans deny the existence of global warming, apparently, they have even blocked funding to monitor its impacts.

This reckless policy rider doesn't just endanger polar bears, coral reefs, and countless other species and ecosystems; it endangers American infrastructure from the Norfolk Naval Base to the Jefferson Memorial.

It endangers public health by increasing smog pollution and heat- related deaths, as we've seen from the recent heat wave that swept across the east and midwest United States, setting record temperatures here in Washington, D.C., Newark, and other cities across this eastern seaboard.

I urge my colleagues to reject this reckless legislation that defunds critical public lands programs, eviscerates 40 years of bipartisan environmental standards, and desecrates the memory of Teddy Roosevelt.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Who are you kidding?

Cut, slash, and burn. You bypassed your own rules to bring it to the floor. You say it protects Medicare. It destroys Medicare. You say you're protecting jobs. You'll cost hundreds of thousands of jobs if this ever saw the light of day in law.

It disinvests in education, R&D, and infrastructure in this country. That equals unilateral disarmament when it comes to global competition and innovation, and we might as well hand it over to our competition in Brazil, China, and India.

Shame on you. I urge the defeat of this phony bill.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, I rise to recognize Lauren Chang of Burke, Va., for her participation in the People to People World Leadership Summit in Washington, D.C.

People to People offers young leaders the opportunity to grow educationally while exposing them to new cultures. Founded in 1956 under the auspices of the Eisenhower Administration, People to People has continuously enjoyed Presidential support for its mission of instilling our nation's next generation of leaders with the international experience they will need to succeed in an increasingly global society and economy.

Lauren's acceptance to the program is no small accomplishment. Academically selective, the program is built for the brightest students in the nation. From June 30-July 6, Lauren participated in numerous educational activities in the Washington, D.C., area, all of which were focused on leadership development. Lauren and her fellow participants gained access to areas of American government rarely seen at such a young age, and that experience will serve her well in her studies.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing Lauren Chang and wishing her continued success in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor Alexander Hornaday, a 2011 People to People World Leadership Forum participant. Alexander has been identified by his educators for his academic excellence, leadership potential and exemplary citizenship to participate in the People to People World Leadership Forum in Washington, D.C.

This leadership forum allows students to participate in daily educational activities in

Washington, D.C., as well as the surrounding areas. The program allows participants to make friends with young leaders from all over the world with a focus on leadership development. At the end of the program, participants receive a certificate of completion.

Alexander is a student at West Springfield High school in Springfield, Virginia. He has been active in his school and community on issues regarding agriculture and environment. It is inspiring to see young people who are interested in educational and developmental experiences such as these.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues to join me in recognizing this remarkable achievement by Alexander Hornaday and wishing him continued success in his further pursuits.