Floor Statements

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 191: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

None of the funds in this Act may be used for the City of

Sedan, KS, for the Rural Water District Number 4 Chautauqua

County for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure.

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 215: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

None of the funds in this Act may be used for the Township

of Cecil, Pennsylvania, Cecil Township Municipal Authority

for the Miller's Run Sewer System.

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 216: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

None of the funds in this Act may be used for the city of

Belfair, Mason County, Washington, for Wastewater Treatment.

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 217: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

None of the funds in this Act may be used for the city of

Mountlake Terrace, Washington, for Water Main System

Replacement.

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 218: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

None of the funds in this Act may be used for the city of

Mercer Island, Washington, for the Mercer Island Sewer Lake

Line Replacement.

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 219: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

None of the funds in this Act may be used for the Borough

of Stoystown, Pennsylvania, Somerset Township Municipal

Authority for Stoystown Water Project.

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 220: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

None of the funds in this Act may be used for the city of

Puyallup for Water and Wastewater Infrastructure.

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 221: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

None of the funds in this Act may be used for the city of

Flint, Michigan, Office of the Genessee County Drain

Commissioner for the North-East Relief Sewer.

I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to thank him for his outstanding leadership on the issue of fiscal responsibility, coming to the floor and offering this series of amendments.

I do want to thank the chairman of the subcommittee and the ranking member. Certainly relative to many other appropriations bills that we have seen and will see on this floor, relatively speaking, this is a more fiscally responsible bill.

But we can never forget that this is not our money; this is the people's money. And every time we are increasing some aspect of the Federal budget, we are taking it away from some family budget. We are taking it away from some family that had a dream of having a down payment on their first home. We are taking it away from some family who was putting that money away for college tuition for one of their children.

So contrary to the debate we hear and the rhetoric about cuts, what this amendment does is say, you know, let's lead by example. In the big scheme of the Federal budget, I know this isn't a huge amount of money. But when you think about having to save us from the single largest tax increase in history that the Democrat majority put in their last budget, shouldn't we lead by example? Is this apocalyptic vision that we hear, is this going to happen if we give the legislative branch the same money they had last year? Somehow there are families all across America who are having to make do on the same income they had last year.

Now, again, relative to other bills, this is more fiscally responsible. But it comes down to a simple choice: Do you want to put us on the path for the largest single tax increase in American history that would impose $3,000 of additional tax burden on American families, or do you want to put us on the path of fiscal responsibility? We should support the gentleman's amendment.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Smith-Stupak amendment to restore the pro-life Mexico City Policy protections that were effectively stripped from this bill.

Human life is a precious commodity and around the globe it is still too often taken for granted. Like millions, in my heart and in my mind, I believe that life begins at conception. And as a Member of this body, I feel I have an obligation to protect the right to life wherever I can. The most effective way to do that now, today, is to support the Mexico City Policy which would prevent our international aid from going to foreign organizations that support or promote abortions.

This policy is based on the simple idea that American taxpayers should not be forced to export abortions with their money. Again, we're talking about taking money away from the American taxpayer and using it to subsidize foreign abortions. For most, this defies common sense. It defies fiscal sense. And it is reprehensible to the millions who believe in the fundamental right to life.

I urge all Members to support the Smith-Stupak amendment.

I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding and I thank him for his leadership.

Again, how amazing. What an amazing place this is, when you are debating whether or not you are going to increase something called Foreign Operations 9.5 percent versus 8.5 percent growth, and somehow that is called a cut. Only in Washington, D.C. can you call an 8.5 percent increase a cut.

Now, the only thing that I see that is being cut is the family budget of hard

working American families as our friends on the other side of the aisle want to enact the single largest tax increase in American history. The average family in America, when this tax increase plan is complete, will have to pay an extra $3,000 a year in taxes. Mr. Chairman, that is a cut.

Mr. Chairman, somehow I have heard that this amendment, the gentleman from Georgia is irresponsible for offering such an amendment. People who work hard for their paychecks in America would be lucky to have an 8.5 percent increase.

We are dealing with Foreign Operations here. Maybe we ought to be thinking about family budget operations. Already the Federal Government is spending $23,289 per American family. Our friends on the other side of the aisle now, as we are debating this appropriation bill, have a plan to spend an extra $23 billion in non-defense discretionary, on top of the $6 billion in the omnibus, on top of the $17 billion in the war supplemental, all to be paid for by the single largest tax increase in history. And it is irresponsible to only increase Foreign Operations 8.5 percent?

Let's protect the family budget from the Federal budget and support this amendment.

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 35: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Hensarling

Amendment No. 36: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

None of the funds in this act may be used by the South

Dakota School of Mines and Technology.

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 37: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 38: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Mr. Hensarling

Amendment No. 39: Page 5, line 26, after the dollar amount,

insert ``(reduced by $55,729,000)''.