Floor Statements

I rise today to commend Chairman Ryan in this effort to craft a sustainable and responsible budget proposal.

This budget represents a valiant effort to effect real change in the way Washington spends taxpayer dollars. This plan couples tangible spending cuts with the entitlement reform necessary to get our budget back into balance starting now and continuing into the long term.

This Republican majority understands that we must end the skyrocketing budgets of the last several years, and this budget reiterates our commitment to smart but limited government spending.

The resolution includes an annual discretionary spending level of $1.019 trillion for next year, bringing us back to the fiscal year 2006 funding levels for non-security programs. This is a reduction of an additional $31 billion from the level that we just passed in the CR.

Based on the experience we've just had in bringing the fiscal year 2011 budget to a close, this will present significant challenges to the Appropriations Committee and the body in the weeks and months ahead. It will not be an easy task, but I know that with the support of House Members, we will rise to that challenge.

In addition, while I commend the budget resolution for making such significant strides to rein in spending and address long-term budget challenges, I do have some concerns over various budget process changes that may have unintended consequences.

For example, the Appropriations Committee may be faced with challenges related to our emergency authority after May 31, the beginning of the hurricane season, due to limitations on the committee's ability to respond to natural disasters and other emergencies.

Along these same lines, there may be challenges related to the committee's flexibility to provide for additional funding--beyond expected needs--for the global war on terror and our military efforts overseas.

I look forward to working with Chairman Ryan and the leadership to address these as well as other process concerns as we go forward.

These matters aside, I applaud this budget proposal. It will help put us back on a path of sustainable spending, allow for job creation and economic growth, and help us make the right fiscal decisions for our Nation's future.

I thank the chairman for the time.

I thank the distinguished chairman of the Rules Committee for the time here. And I thank him for the diligent work that he continues to do as chair of the Rules Committee, the sort of traffic cop for the bills that reach this floor.

I want to expand a bit, Madam Speaker, on a point that Chairman Dreier alluded to earlier, and that is the historic nature of the bill that we will be considering on the floor. As the chairman pointed out, under Speaker Pelosi, discretionary spending in those 2 years increased by 82 percent--a record. With this bill, we not only are arresting that growth, but we are receding actual discretionary spending by a record amount, nearly $40 billion in actual cuts in spending. That has not ever been accomplished by this body in its history, in the history of the country. The cuts in this bill exceed anything ever passed by the House. It's the largest cut ever--by four times. The largest previous single cut was in 1995, when we cut around $9 billion. With this bill, you cut almost $40 billion.

Now I don't understand sometimes my friends on the other side of the aisle when they criticize this bill. It's being supported by your President. He says, pass the bill. It's what we agreed upon. It's being supported by Senator Reid, the leader on the Senate side. It's being supported by the Speaker of the House. And it's being supported by an overwhelming number of Members on this side of the aisle, and I predict a great number of Democrats likewise support the bill.

Now on the Defense portion of this bill, let me briefly refer to it. The provisions in this bill about the Defense budget are much like they were when all parties last December on both sides of the aisle in this body and on both sides of the aisle in the Senate body agreed to the expenditures for the Department of Defense. We simply lifted those agreed-upon provisions for the Defense Department and dropped them into this bill.

There are two people in this body that know more about Defense spending than any of the rest of us, and that's the chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee on Appropriations, Bill Young of Florida, and my good friend, Norman Dicks, the ranking member of that subcommittee and the ranking member on the full Appropriations Committee. He worked long and hard with Bill Young for these provisions. And I salute him for it. It's good work. It does the right things. It cuts back on the President's request for Defense. It does increase in real dollars, about $5 billion, over the current spending rate. But we're in three wars. And there's no reason at all for us to shirk from the responsibility to provide adequate funding for our troops in combat. And that's the reason why, one of the big reasons why we support this bill, why the President supports the bill, and why Senator Reid and the Senate supports the bill.

And so let's focus on actual cuts in spending. We all profess that we want to cut back on the deficit for the year and for the ensuing years. The deficit this year, $1.4 trillion in just 1 year, the largest in history, adding to a debt that exceeds all of our fears of some $14.2 or $14.3 trillion. We all say, let's cut back on spending. Here is your chance. Here is your opportunity.

If you profess to be a fiscally responsible Member of this House, you have a chance, yea, an obligation, to vote for this bill and support it. It's historic. We've never been here before. We've reached a pinnacle and a great opportunity for us to show to the rest of the country that we're serious about controlling the free-spending nature of this body. This is your chance. Don't miss it.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the order of the House of today, I call up the bill (H.R. 1363) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment thereto, and I have a motion at the desk.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1363.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, we come here tonight just moments before the government is forced to close its doors with very good news. We have an agreement with the Senate and the White House to fund the government for the rest of the fiscal year, while providing critical resources for our national defense.

In addition, when this agreement is signed into law, we will have taken the unprecedented step of passing the largest non-defense spending cut in the history of the Nation, tens of billions of dollars larger than any other non-defense reduction. This remarkable achievement is the result of hard-fought negotiations that required all sides to come together to find common ground.

The American people need and deserve to have a functioning government, but they also deserve a government that spends its taxpayer dollars responsibly, a government that won't saddle their children and grandchildren with unsustainable and reckless debt.

Our constituents have sent us the message that the standard tax-and- spend culture in Washington is no longer acceptable. It has been the goal of this new Republican majority to keep precious tax dollars where they are needed most, in the hands of businesses and individuals across the Nation so that they can create jobs and grow our economy.

This agreement will mark the end of a budget process that should have been completed almost a year ago by the previous Congress. Yet sometimes the end result is worth the wait, and the unparalleled spending cuts in this bill will not only save the taxpayers tens of billions of dollars this year, but will allow Congress to continue the trend of reductions to dig our Nation out of our dangerous deficits and debt for years to come.

Now that a broad agreement has been reached, my committee will work over the next few days to craft legislation to bring to the floor next week.

While we continue to work, we must make responsible decisions to fund our troops and their families, keep the lights on in government, and continue to provide the services that Americans depend on every day.

This temporary CR allows us to meet these needs by providing funding through next Friday, April 15, while also making $2 billion in additional spending cuts to show the American people that we are serious about cutting spending wherever and whenever we can.

Mr. Speaker, I guarantee the final legislation will rein in Federal spending, and this CR keeps us on track to cut excessive Federal spending as we continue to finalize a deal. We are determined to deliver to the American people a complete budget with historic levels of deep and real spending cuts, cuts that will keep our economy moving in the right direction.

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

Will the gentleman yield?

I really deeply appreciate the gentleman's reminding us again that he and I are determined to bring to the floor every single one of the 12 appropriations bills and complete our work in the House before the August recess.

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

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

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the rule, I call up the bill (H.R. 1363) making appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2011, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 1363 and that I may include tabular material on the same.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to support H.R. 1363, the Department of Defense and Further Additional Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011.

I ask my colleagues, Madam Speaker, to support this bill so that we can avoid a government shutdown and provide the necessary time to finally complete negotiations on a final funding agreement for the rest of the 2011 fiscal year.

This bill funds government operations for 1 week while reducing spending by $12 billion. These cuts include funding rescissions, reductions, and program terminations from nearly all areas of the government. Virtually all of these cuts were also included in H.R. 1, and many were included in the President's budget requests, the Senate's alternative to H.R. 1, or the recent OMB CR proposal.

Most importantly, Madam Speaker, this bill supports our troops and our national security by providing funding for our national defense for the remainder of this fiscal year. Our troops and their families deserve to have the financial security we promised them while we continue to work towards a final budget agreement.

After months of uncertainty, it's high time we provide for our national security in a responsible way. This means commonsense funding that ensures the safety of our war fighters and the success of our missions abroad.

However, while this legislation points us in the right direction on security and spending cuts, what we all want right now is to wrap up these negotiations, complete the process for 2011, and move our many other important legislative items onto the table.

As I have said many times before, Madam Speaker, short-term measures like this are not the preferable way to fund the government. So while no one wants to fund the government in 1- or 2-week bursts, this short- term CR is what we must do to prevent a government shutdown and allow time to pass a smart and thoughtful bill for the rest of the year.

Madam Speaker, coming into this Congress, the Democrats left us with a financial mess: soaring deficits, unchecked spending, and no budget, not a single appropriations bill for 2011. And now that we're 6 months into the fiscal year, the Senate Democrats have yet to produce any plan to help clean up this mess.

Despite all the roadblocks we've faced throughout this process, we must continue down the path to fiscal solvency, and this CR both affords us the time required to complete negotiations as well as makes the spending cuts needed to continue to help balance our budgets. We are committed to making real spending cuts like these to reduce our deficits both now and in the future. We are determined to complete this work where Democrats failed to do so.

While answering our constituents' calls to reduce excessive government spending, this bill provides time to negotiate in an honest way to do what is only right for our constituents, our Nation, and our financial future. Let's pass this bill and finally get this leftover work from last year behind us once and for all.

Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

I would point out, Madam Speaker, that this bill would prevent a shutdown. This keeps the government operating. That's one aspect of it.

I yield 3 minutes to the very distinguished chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee and former chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Young).

Madam Speaker, insofar as the military is concerned, this is not a CR. This funds the Department for the balance of the year. The rest of the bill, of course, is the CR.

I yield 3 minutes to the very hardworking chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a member of our committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Carter).

I yield 2 minutes to the chairman on our committee of the Subcommittee for Transportation and HUD, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham).

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Madam Speaker, may I inquire of the time remaining on both sides?

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to one of my hardworking subcommittee chairmen on Appropriations, the chairman of the Interior Subcommittee, the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).

I reserve the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds.

Chairman Simpson a moment ago referred and reminded us that we're in this mess that we're in because the other side, when they controlled the House last year, failed to pass a single appropriations bill and left the mess in our hands when we took over in January. And now they are complaining about the way we're trying to clean up their mess. It reminds me a bit of Abraham Lincoln back in Illinois when he was practicing law spoke of a man who was accused of killing his parents, and in court made a plea that he was an orphan.

I yield 2 minutes, Madam Speaker, to the chairman on the Financial Services Subcommittee on our full committee, the gentlelady from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson).

I yield the gentlelady an additional 30 seconds.

I yield 1 minute to a member of our committee, and a good one, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to a brand- new member of our committee, and a hardworking one at that, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Austria).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to another new member of our committee and a new Member of Congress; but he is doing a great job, the gentleman from Mississippi (Mr. Nunnelee).

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Brooks) a member of the Armed Services Committee.

I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Pence).

(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

May I inquire of the time remaining?

Madam Speaker, I am prepared to close.

Madam Speaker, what the gentleman is asking is if we will continue the status quo. We do not and cannot accept the status quo.

Madam Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Buerkle), a new Member of this body.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Griffin).

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Let's try to summarize here. The Democrats left us, when we took control of the House, in a mess. You hadn't passed a single appropriations bill. You passed a CR until March 4. We prepared and put into play and passed in the House a continuing resolution that would have funded the government entirely for the balance of the year, including the military, and sent it to the other body. And they have said nothing, and that was 2 months ago.

When that time ran out in March, this body passed a second CR for 2 weeks. Sent that to the Senate. We haven't heard from them since. That time ran out. We passed a third CR. We passed it to the Senate, not a peep. Nothing.

And now a fourth time, now a fourth CR where we are going to give the Senate another chance to come forward with what they propose in a CR. They have yet to pass anything. And I have to say this, too: The White House has been late in coming to the aid of their party. The White House has been absent from the battle until the last few days.

And now you come to us and say, look, here's what we complain about on your cleaning up our mess. And I say to you, this bill takes care of our military, our young men and women fighting in three wars on the other side of the world. And the Commander in Chief of the military is saying I'm going to veto the bill that pays their salaries and supports their families back home. I find that inexplicable, inexplicable that the Commander in Chief would put an end to the pay of our soldiers.

The failure of the Senate to act and the failure of the White House to act when we pass this bill means a vote to shut down the government. Vote ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, pursuant to section 8120 of Division A of H.R. 1363 as passed the House on April 7, 2011, Chairman Rogers submits the following explanatory statement:

Madam Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's motion.

Madam Speaker, I wish to speak on the point of order.

Madam Speaker, the amendment, or motion, proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill. The amendment is not in order under section 3(j)(3) of House Resolution 5, 112th Congress, which states:

``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''

The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Madam Speaker, I move to table the motion.

Madam Speaker, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's motion.

Madam Speaker, I withdraw my reservation on the point of order.

I rise in opposition to the motion.

Madam Speaker, this procedural motion is nothing more than a dilatory tactic which comes at a time when we can least afford those types of things. Now is the time to act, not partake in political games.

Our debate should be not about procedure. It should be about doing our job. It should be about funding our troops, about keeping our government running, and saving the taxpayer money.

The measure before us provides the essential funds for our men and women who are in harm's way on three battlefields around the world. Those who sacrifice so much for us should not be held hostage by Washington's inaction while providing for our national defense. The measure also gives us one more week for the Senate and the White House to come to a resolution on funding the activities of the government, and it cuts $12 billion in wasteful spending.

The American people expect us to stop the partisan bickering and get our work done. The time for idle talk is over. Enough is enough.

This motion is purely a political gesture and should be defeated. I think all Members should know, Madam Speaker, this bill is not a political tactic. The real fact is that if you vote against this bill, you are voting against the troops who are engaged in three wars.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor, commend and congratulate Mr. Bill Samuels, Jr. as he retires from his post as president of Maker's Mark. The Commonwealth of Kentucky is known across the world for its horses as well as its whiskey, in no small part because of the expert craftsmanship and emphasis on quality of Mr. Samuels, following in the footsteps of the seven generations of bourbon distillers in his family. It is fitting that Mr. Samuels will say ``so long,'' though certainly not goodbye to his life's work, at the Thoroughbreds & Redheads event in conjunction with the Maker's Mark Mile race at Lexington's beautiful Keeneland racecourse.

Mr. Samuels' storied career in Loretto is marked by a strong commitment to tradition and entrepreneurship. Maker's Mark is the product of the nation's oldest operating bourbon distillery, and during its celebrated history, its timeless quality has been recognized with numerous awards.

But Mr. Samuels was unwilling to allow Maker's Mark to rest on its laurels. During his career, Mr. Samuels revitalized the brand by developing clever advertising marked by clean, stark design that accentuated his wit while adapting the culture of Kentucky for consumption across the United States and around the world. From a billboard in New York's financial district alluding to Maker's Mark's trademark wax with the slogan ``trickle-down economics'' to a print ad proclaiming ``If we could make it any faster, we wouldn't,'' Mr. Samuels' efforts are omnipresent, eye-catching, and memorable, transforming Maker's Mark into a thoroughly modern brand while bringing along a bit of Kentucky spirit.

Under his apt stewardship, Maker's Mark has achieved a historic milestone by selling one million cases annually of what is perhaps Kentucky's best known export. The success of Maker's Mark is a reaffirmation of Kentucky's love of tradition, vibrant economy, and good taste. In his forty-four years tirelessly working to expand his family's business and better his community by producing a true Kentucky original, Mr. Samuels has captured the culture and heritage of the Commonwealth in the bourbon handcrafted in the fabled oak barrels of Marion County and has shared it with the world. I wish to congratulate Mr. Samuels upon his retirement for his decades of dedication as a global ambassador of our state and to wish him the best in whatever endeavors his future may hold.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Rockcastle County High School Lady Rockets Basketball Team who captured the 2011 Kentucky High School Athletic Association's State Championship title. Coach Chrysti Noble led the team to an incredible victory that our region will cherish for years to come.

On March 12, 2011, the Lady Rockets defeated a talented team from Dupont Manual High School, winning 62 to 60 in a game forced into overtime. With one second remaining, senior Angie Lawrence hit the game-winning shot.

The state title is the realization of a dream come true, especially for the team's seniors. As teammates in the fifth grade, the girls experienced success as Rockcastle County's first team to earn a trip to the Amateur Athletic Union's national tournament. After tasting victory, they decided their next goal was to win the Kentucky State Championship in high school. Heart and determination have always separated this team from the competition.

In addition, I commend the tournament's most valuable player, Kentucky's first-ever McDonald's All American, Sara Hammond, for the leadership she demonstrated throughout her career at Rockcastle County High School, both on and off the court. Sara has been a prominent advocate for Operation UNITE, spreading a drug-free message to the youth in southern and eastern Kentucky.

I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Chrysti Noble and the 2011 Lady Rockets as the KHSAA State Champions. Coach Noble and her student- athletes have demonstrated outstanding dedication, teamwork, unselfishness and sportsmanship throughout the course of the season in achieving this great honor. I congratulate them and wish them all the best in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Pikeville College Bears for winning the 2011 NAIA Division I Men's Basketball Championship. Coach Kelly Wells masterfully guided the unseeded Cinderella team to earn the division crown.

On March 22, 2011, the Bears defeated a talented team from Mountain State University, winning 83 to 76 in overtime.

The team surpassed a number of expectations this season, setting a school-record with 30 wins and becoming the first unseeded team in NAIA history to beat five seeded teams for the championship title. The accomplishments of this team will be shared with pride in the mountains for generations to come.

In addition, I commend Coach Kelly Wells on being named the National Coach of the Year and I congratulate the tournament's most valuable player, Trevor Setty, who finished the tournament with 108 points, including 18 three-point shots and 49 rebounds.

I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Coach Kelly Wells and the 2011 NAIA Division I Men's Basketball Champions. Coach Wells, his staff and his players displayed outstanding dedication, teamwork, unselfishness and sportsmanship throughout the course of the season in achieving this great honor. I congratulate them and wish them all the best in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to Jim Shackleford, the president of TECO Coal, in honor of his retirement after contributing more than 27 years to the TECO Energy subsidiary and thousands of families in the Appalachian coal fields.

Jim Shackleford is both an astute businessman and a dedicated humanitarian. Under his watch, TECO Coal sales increased from an annual one million tons of coal for one utility, to annual sales of nine million tons of coal to third-party international and domestic customers. Mr. Shackleford's vision for TECO Coal amounted to hundreds of high-paying jobs across all six TECO Coal operations for families in central Appalachia.

With a heart of compassion, Mr. Shackleford structured TECO Coal as a good steward of the communities in which it operates. He awarded thousands of dollars of donations to various community organizations, emergency response groups and schools. He established the TECO Coal Children's Fund to provide clothing and toys to about one thousand underprivileged youth each year. In addition, many families have food on the table, thanks to TECO's support of local food banks.

Jim Shackleford's impeccable leadership skills have been coveted by organizations across southern and eastern Kentucky. He is a member of the Kentucky Coal Association board of directors and is a former chairman. He served as the former chairman of the board of the Whitley County Forward in the Fifth, was an advisory board member for Baptist Regional Medical Center and served on the Corbin Little League Board of Directors.

I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring Jim Shackleford. I congratulate him on his retirement and wish him all the best in the years to come.

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the rule, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 48) making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2011, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.J. Res. 48, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

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

I rise today to support H.J. Res. 48, the fiscal year 2011 further continuing appropriations resolution. This temporary CR will allow us to avoid a government shutdown that could otherwise occur on March 18, while cutting spending by $6 billion to control our Nation's staggering deficits and to facilitate the continued recovery of our Nation's economy.

We've made it clear that a government shutdown is not an option, period. We will not allow this to happen on our watch.

This bill funds the government for an additional 3 weeks, until April 8, maintaining the critical support the government provides to the American people and allowing for the necessary time to complete negotiations on a final long-term agreement for the remainder of this year.

While funding the essential government agencies and programs, this CR makes $6 billion in spending cuts, trimming $2 billion for every week, to continue our efforts to rein in spending and put a dent in our massive and unsustainable deficit. Together with the $4 billion that we cut 2 weeks ago, Mr. Speaker, along with the $6 billion we cut in this bill, we will have cut $10 billion from current year spending. That makes it the largest rescission in American history, and so it is working.

H.J. Res. 48 reduces or terminates a total of 25 programs for a savings of $3.5 billion. These cuts include funding rescissions, reductions, and program terminations. It also eliminates earmark accounts within the Agriculture; Commerce, Justice and Science; Financial Services; General Government; and Interior subcommittee jurisdictions, saving the American taxpayers $2.6 billion in earmark spending, which the President and both Houses of Congress have agreed they do not support.

These cuts are the tough, but necessary, legwork required to help balance our budgets and halt the dangerous downward spiral of skyrocketing deficits. While short-term funding measures such as this are not the preferable way to fund the government, at this point, it's vital.

The budget for fiscal 2011, which was punted to us by the previous Congress, is long, long overdue. I agree with many of my colleagues that we must get down to business and come to a final agreement as quickly as possible. Our economy must not be threatened by perpetual government shutdowns, which create uncertainty and a loss of confidence for job creators across the country.

This continuing resolution provides us with an appropriate length of time for negotiations, makes good on our promise to the American people to cut spending, provides certainty and stability, and allows essential Federal programs to continue while these negotiations ensue.

I'm hopeful, Mr. Speaker, that this continuing resolution can be passed swiftly so we can turn our attention to the realities of our debt and deficit crisis and begin to put the Nation on the right path for the next fiscal year, 2012.

Our constituents have asked us to whip our spending into shape, to provide solutions that help our economy grow, and to help our citizens get jobs. This CR addresses their expectations responsibly over the short term and is just one of the set of bills that we intend to produce over the next year that will continue to put the Nation's budget back into balance and help our economy continue on the road to recovery.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Florida, a new member of our committee, Mr. Diaz-Balart.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham), the chairman of the Transportation, HUD, and Related Agencies Subcommittee on Appropriations.

I yield myself 1 minute.

The gentleman from Virginia says that the public deserves that we pass appropriations bills, and I could not agree with him more. His majority last year failed to enact a single bill out of the 12 that we were supposed to pass. That's why we're here. We're trying to clean up the mess that the gentleman from Virginia's party left us when we took office in January.

Yes, it's a terrible way to do business. And this should be the last CR extension that we pass before we have an agreement with the other body and the White House on the rest of this year. However, Mr. Speaker, again, the gentleman's party in the Senate refuses to pass a bill and lay something on the table. We are going to the conference table to negotiate, and we're sitting there by ourselves. The other body will not come forward with a proposition. Until that time, I don't know what we do.

I yield 3 minutes to the chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt).

Will the gentleman yield?

You know, it was stated a moment ago by a gentleman on the other side that this CR cuts NOAA and the tsunami prediction monies. That is not so. The only thing in this bill that cuts money from NOAA are the earmarks, and, yes, we cut the earmarks, but they had nothing to do with tsunami warning.

Will the gentleman yield?

H.R. 1 doesn't cut tsunami warning monies nor weather service monies.

Well, NOAA's wrong.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a new member of our committee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Dent).

Will the gentleman yield?

Would the gentleman talk to his colleagues over in the other body and tell them to pass something we can begin to negotiate on?

Of which I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Interior Subcommittee on Appropriation, the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to a very hardworking member of our committee, the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole).

Will the gentleman yield?

Let me join, on behalf of us on this side, in thanking those two wonderful individuals for their dedicated public service. They have worked hard on behalf of the public, and they deserve our utmost thanks, which I offer at this time.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, may I inquire of the time remaining on our side?

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a very hardworking member of our committee, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Bonner).

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a new member of our committee, a hardworking member, the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack).

May I inquire of the time remaining, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Hurt).

Madam Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to a hardworking member of our committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. LaTourette).

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Madam Speaker, this provision doesn't do anything. Nothing in the CR would cut Social Security or Medicare benefits, nor would it privatize Social Security. We are totally committed in this bill to saving Social Security.

Let me be honest. This is a procedural motion that is simply a fog screen, trying to hide us from our real task at hand, but I don't think we'll be fooled at that. The debate should not be about procedure or fog screens or things unrelated to the bill. It should be about doing our job.

We are here this afternoon to provide the necessary resources to keep the government's doors open while we lock in important budget savings totaling $6 billion. That is $2 billion in spending reductions, or savings, to the taxpayer, $2 billion a week, the path this body has set with the passage of H.R. 1 a couple of weeks ago.

I would also like to remind my colleagues that, with the passage of this CR today, we will have cut over $10 billion in the span of 2 weeks. That sets a record. That has never been done before in this body. The closest was 1995 at $9 billion. This is more than double the $4.7 billion that Senator Reid and the Senate Democrats proposed in their CR last week to fund the government for the remaining 6 months. We do in 2 weeks what they would take 6 months to do.

The American people sent us here with a clear message last November. They want us to end the partisan bickering and get our work done. Instead of picking political fights, they want us united in cutting the budget. This motion moves us further away from that goal. It would send us backwards, not forwards. It's a smokescreen, a procedural motion.

Let's get on with it. Vote ``no,'' and then vote ``yes'' on final.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the rule, I call up the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 44) making further continuing appropriations for fiscal year 2011, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

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

I rise today in support of H.J. Res. 44, the fiscal year 2011 Further Continuing Appropriations resolution.

This temporary CR is an extra special effort by the majority Republicans to avoid a government shutdown that could otherwise occur on March 4, when the current funding resolution expires. This temporary CR contains funding to allow all government agencies and programs to continue at the current rate of spending for the next 2 weeks until March 18, 2011, while reducing spending by $4 billion through several spending cuts and program terminations. These cuts reflect this Republican majority's continued commitment to significantly reduce spending, to rein in the Nation's exploding deficits and debt, and to help our economy continue on the road to recovery.

Madam Speaker, a government shutdown would halt critical and necessary services and programs that Americans across the country rely on, and it is not what our constituents expect or demand.

I would have greatly preferred that the Senate act on the hard-fought and thoughtfully crafted funding legislation that the House passed almost 2 weeks ago which saves the taxpayers $100 billion compared to the President's request, but it's clear that the Senate needs more time. So this short-term CR will provide an additional 2 weeks by cutting spending to show our continued resolve to get our Nation's fiscal house in order.

The bill before us terminates eight programs for a savings of about $1.24 billion. These eight programs were all targeted for elimination in the President's budget request and have also been part of proposed cuts in the past in the House and the Senate by Members of both parties. These eight programs include: Election Assistance Grants, the Broadband Direct Loan Subsidy, the Smithsonian Institution Legacy Fund, the Striving Readers program, the LEAP program, Even Start, Smaller Learning Communities, and a one-time highway funding addition.

In addition, the bill also eliminates more than $2.7 billion in funding previously reserved for earmarks, eliminations that the House, the Senate, and the White House have all called for this year. The earmark funding cuts in this legislation come from Energy and Water; Homeland Security; Labor, Health and Human Services; legislative branch; and Transportation, Housing and Urban Development program accounts.

This legislation will represent the second of many appropriations bills this year that will significantly reduce spending, continuing a pattern of cuts that will help put our Nation's budget back in balance and stop the dangerous spiral of unsustainable deficits and debt.

It is my hope that this CR can be passed quickly and that the President will sign it before the March 4 deadline. This legislation should garner broad support today, given the short timeframe for action and given the fact that these spending cuts have received previous bipartisan support by Members of the House and Senate as well as the White House.

Madam Speaker, we're now 5 months into the current fiscal year and it's critically important that we complete this budget process so that we can turn our attention quickly to passing funding bills for fiscal year 2012. It is high time we start looking forward instead of constantly looking back to clean up past mistakes and inaction. We must move forward quickly in regular order, passing bills on time in an open and transparent fashion to avoid these budget uncertainties in the future.

Madam Speaker, this is one more step that we have to take to get our fiscal house in order. While this isn't a perfect or an easy process, it is essential that we pass this bill, avoid a government shutdown, and continue to work on a long-term solution to complete this long overdue funding process. Our constituents expect and deserve no less.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself 30 seconds.

The gentleman, who is my friend, mentioned the economists and their opinion of H.R. 1, the budget-cutting bill we passed a couple of weeks ago.

The best source that I think of, right off, is Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, who has said H.R. 1 would have no negligible harmful impact on the economy. And if the Chairman of the Federal Reserve says that, I tend to believe him.

Now I yield 3 minutes to the chairman of the Energy and Water Subcommittee on our committee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Frelinghuysen).

I yield 2 minutes to the chairman of the Agriculture Subcommittee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Will the gentleman yield?

Is the gentleman aware that Ben Bernanke, the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, now says that H.R. 1 would have no harmful effect on the economy?

And that cutting spending and reducing the deficit will give confidence to the business community to hire people and put people to work.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt).

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the chairman of the Labor-HHS subcommittee on appropriations, the gentleman from Montana (Mr. Rehberg).

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Austria).

Madam Speaker, I yield myself 1 minute to point out to the body that over the last 2 years, the Congress went on a spending spree and increased spending by 84 percent in just 2 years. You ran the deficit up; the annual deficit, now two in a row, trillion- dollar-plus deficits per year, record breaking. We have never had that before. You ran the debt up to where now we are bouncing against the ceiling and the Congress will be called upon to increase the debt ceiling.

There were no appropriations bills passed last year at all. Thus that's why we are here today. So let's talk about the spending spree that we're trying to slow down and stop, Madam Speaker, with this bill.

I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Graves), a member of our committee.

Madam Speaker, may I inquire of the time remaining.

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to a brand- new member of the committee, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Yoder).

Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Hurt).

Madam Speaker, I wish they had done better last year and passed one appropriations bill.

General Leave

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.J. Res. 44, and that I may include tabular material on the same.

Madam Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the chairman of the MilCon and VA Subcommittee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).

May I inquire as to how much time is remaining.

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

Let's be clear what it is we're voting on here today. This is a short-term, 2-week CR. It cuts $4 billion, a little over $4 billion in spending that both parties have agreed to in the past, both bodies in the House and Senate have agreed to in the past, and agreed to by the White House.

So what are we talking about here? This is a 2-week extension. It's about as clean as you can make it. And, oh, by the way, speaking about that bill we passed 2 weeks ago, H.R. 1, that cuts $61 billion off of current spending, Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve, said as late as today that that bill will have no harmful effect on the economy. I don't know that there's a bigger, better source on the economy than the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, and he says no problem.

Now, what the Democrats want to do, Madam Speaker--this is pretty simple--they want to freeze spending. They want to freeze spending at the biggest bloated level we've ever had.

They increased spending 84 percent over the last 2 years. Now they want to freeze and they'll go no higher. Well, it's bloated. We want to take it back down to where it's reasonable, where we can live with it. So we don't want another $1.7 trillion-a-year deficit like they've had the last year and, before that, something approaching that.

So I ask Members to vote for this short-term CR, to give us time to work with the other body on H.R. 1 to find out what their position is, about which we have no idea at this moment. They haven't acted. And so to avert a closedown of the government, which is what we're after here, we want to give the Senate time to look at H.R. 1 and tell us what their position is so we can have a conversation about it. And, frankly, 2 weeks is plenty of time, plenty of time in the House. I know the Senate works a bit more slowly, but 2 weeks should be plenty.

So, Madam Speaker, I urge Members to vote for this reasonable, fair, budget-cutting extension of the time to shut down the government. Vote ``yes'' and keep the government operating.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's motion to recommit.

If I understand the gentleman's motion correctly, it would, for a 2-week period, attempt to change the Tax Code to single out resource companies and increase their costs of doing business. This misguided policy can only lead to higher energy prices, continued reliance on foreign oil, and economic hardship that hampers job creation.

At a time when gasoline is currently approaching $4 a gallon around the country and when our resources are being threatened by the instability in the Middle East, we should be encouraging domestic energy production--not cutting it down.

We're talking about a 2-week continuing resolution to keep the government running past Friday, reduce spending, and avoid a government shutdown. This is neither the time nor the place to inject an unrelated job-crushing, controversial rider to the CR that will absolutely hinder its chance of passing in the Senate before this Friday when the current CR expires.

I urge defeat of this ill-advised motion.

I now yield to the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson), chairman of the Interior Subcommittee Appropriations.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chair, pursuant to section 8119 of Division A of H.R. 1 as passed the House on February 18, 2011 Chairman Rogers submits the following explanatory statement:

reprogramming guidance

For fiscal year 2011, the Department of Defense is directed

to adhere to the definition of Program, Project and Activity,

and to follow the guidance for Congressional Special Interest

Items, Reprogrammings, Reprogramming Reporting Requirements,

and

Funding Increases, as specified in the Explanatory Statement,

Division A, Department of Defense Appropriations Act Fiscal

Year 2010, Public Law 111-118.

classified annex

A classified annex accompanying this Act will be forwarded

under separate cover.

(Rescissions)

Language is included that rescinds $1,113,536,000 from the

following programs: 2009 Appropriations:

Weapons and Tracked Combat Vehicles, Army:

Future Combat Systems...................................$86,300,000

Other Procurement, Army:

Armored Security Vehicles................................55,000,000

Force XXII Battle Command Brigade and Below..............30,600,000

Semi-trailers, Flatbed...................................62,000,000

Aircraft Procurement, Navy:

Madam Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the gentleman's amendment.

Madam Chairman, I make a point of order against the amendment because it proposes to change existing law and constitutes legislation in an appropriation bill and therefore violates clause 2 of rule XXI, which states in pertinent part: an amendment to a general appropriation bill shall not be in order if changing existing law. The amendment attempts to create a legislative formula for spending.

I ask for a ruling.

I object.

I thank the gentleman for yielding time.

I am in opposition to this amendment, Madam Chairman. The House Republican package that we have before us already represents the largest reduction in discretionary spending in the history of the Nation. It is a historic package with much needed spending cuts and reductions that meet and exceed the pledged goal of cutting $100 billion.

In this package, there is $106 billion in cut spending, including the termination of 150 programs. These reductions were tough, thoughtful, and were made by the people who know those programs best. They went through the budget line by line, cutting or eliminating programs that don't work or that we can no longer afford. The subcommittee chairs, the staff, and our Members worked around the clock to make it happen. They did the hard work of getting deep into the weeds, making the best possible choices of exactly where and how to make these cuts.

In contrast, rather than make careful decisions on specific programs, the Jordan amendment hits everything indiscriminately and in a heavy- handed way. We were elected to make choices, not run on automatic pilot.

Madam Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that during further consideration of H.R. 1 in the Committee of the Whole pursuant to House Resolution 92 and the order of the House of February 17, 2011, it shall be in order for the chair or ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations to offer amendments en bloc consisting of amendments specified in the order of the House of February 17 not earlier disposed of, and that amendments so offered shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by said chair and ranking minority member, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole.

The gentleman is correct.

Thank you for yielding, and I appreciate the gentleman offering this much-needed amendment.

Almost immediately after taking office, Mr. Chairman, the administration put a bull's-eye on Appalachian coal from every angle, including from the OSM. As a representative of Appalachian Kentucky, like Ohio where the gentleman is from, we're losing thousands of jobs because of these policies. And now, by its own admission, the OSM and the U.S. Department of the Interior are placing 7,000 mining jobs across the country on the chopping block, representing 9 percent of the industry, by reopening the long-settled stream protection rule.

And so I congratulate the gentleman for bringing this to our attention with this amendment. A report that was leaked by OSM indicates amending this rule will cause coal production to drop drastically or remain stagnant in 22 States. So it comes as no surprise to me that officials from Kentucky, West Virginia, Utah, Wisconsin, Texas, and others have blasted this proposal as nonsensical and difficult to follow.

Mr. Johnson has the right idea with this amendment, which would prohibit OSM from moving forward with this rule during this fiscal year. I thank the gentleman.

I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, we in this bill made it a point of being very careful about the cuts to the DOD and Homeland Security. We think it's the reasonable approach that's in the base bill. We do not need this type of a heavy, deep cut in the defense of the country here and abroad.

So I oppose the amendment.

I yield to the gentleman from Utah.

Is this an across-the-board cut of the other agencies?

But it's across the board?

I'm in strong opposition to across-the-board cuts. We were elected to make choices. And on this bill we've made our choices, and we think we've done a fairly decent job of spreading the pain across the board.

But to have an across-the-board cut would mean putting our decisionmaking on automatic pilot, refusing to make decisions. And that's what we were elected to do.

So I oppose the gentleman's amendment.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Will the gentleman yield?

I want to thank the gentleman for bringing this amendment forward. I think it's very worthwhile and I support him, and I appreciate him bringing the amendment forward.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, here the gentleman goes again. He is attempting to cut without specifying where the cuts come from.

There's no tough choices identified in the amendment. All it says is just to reduce the appropriations by $280 million, exempting DOD and Postal Service. But across-the-board cuts is a way for us to escape responsibility for making choices that people elected us to do, and this amendment does not specify where the cuts come from or who is to make the cuts.

I guess he would leave it up to the bureaucrats to decide where to cut, but that's what we were elected to do, Mr. Chairman, and so I oppose the amendment. I sympathize with the desire to cut more spending, but I want it done in a judicious and specific way.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order on the amendments.

Mr. Chairman, the amendments propose a net increase in budget authority in the bill. The amendments are not in order under section 3(j)(3) of House Resolution 5, 112th Congress which states, ``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease of such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''

The amendments propose a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section. I ask for a ruling.

Less than 50, 18 of which, I think, are subject to a point of order.

Before the gentleman yields back, Mr. Chairman, I think all of us understands how important it is that we finish this bill tonight. Therefore, the shorter we can make our speeches, the better off we all are.

So we hope to ask each one of you, as you offer your amendments and the rebuttals, to be brief, understanding that the rest of us would like to leave here just as quickly as we can.

Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.