Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, there are those in Congress who want to restrict antibiotic use in animal agriculture. They overlook the good these drugs do to improve both animal and human health. If animal antibiotics are restricted to only treatment of already sick animals, animal disease and death can be expected to increase, while decreasing the abundance and safety of our food supply.

When Denmark banned antibiotics for growth promotion in pigs, animal deaths and disease rose, requiring the use of more drugs for therapeutic purposes. Meanwhile, there was no improvement in human health.

Potential increases in the occurrence of food-borne illnesses in the absence of animal antibiotics are another concern. An Ohio State University study found that pigs raised outdoors without antibiotics had more exposure to food-borne pathogens than those raised in confinement.

Use of animal antibiotics should be determined by a scientific, risk- benefit analysis, not an arbitrary ban devised by politicians.

Madam Speaker, over the past several years, I have worked hard to remind my colleagues in Congress and the Americans that they represent of a real threat of a nuclear Iran. The Obama administration has been engaged in discussions with Iran during the last several months.

As many of us expected, the President's open hand to Tehran was met with a clinched fist. Despite international efforts to negotiate with Iran, Iranian leaders continue to be devious and defiant. Enough; now is the time for Congress to act. Fortunately today the House of Representatives did.

Iran already possesses enough nuclear fuel to build two nuclear weapons. Even while negotiations were taking place, Iran continued to enrich uranium in defiance of five United Nations Security Council resolutions, increasing its supply of uranium and becoming more and more dangerous each and every day.

While there are many domestic issues that demand the attention of us in Congress, we must not forget an Iranian call for a world without a United States or an Israel. A nuclear-armed Iran threatens the safety of American troops in the region. It is a threat to Israel's existence, emboldens terrorist groups Hamas and Hezbollah and leads to a perilous nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

These are all things we cannot accept and must not tolerate.

Passage of the Iran Refined Petroleum Sanctions Act takes an important step to counter the Iranian threat to our national security and to that of our strong democratic ally Israel.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding an earmark I received as part of H.R. 3288, the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY 2010.

Requesting Member: Congressman Jerry Moran

Bill Number: H.R. 3288

Account: Military Construction/VA, Department of Defense, Army

Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Fort Riley, Kansas

Address of Requesting Entity: 500 Huebner Road, Fort Riley, KS 66442

Description of Request: Provide $7,100,000 to upgrade the Estes Road access control point at Fort Riley, KS to a primary use gate, to include new guard booths for new entry and exit lanes, perimeter fencing, visitor's center, gatehouse with over-watch position, and additional road extensions for the intersections of Victory Drive, Armistead Road, and Kitty Drive.

Mr. Speaker, Americans are being forced to foot the bill for trillions of dollars of increased government spending this year while they are struggling to make their own ends meet.

As Kansans sit at their kitchen table trying to balance their checkbooks, this Congress has been borrowing and spending money like there is no tomorrow. The latest example of this reckless spending is a 2,500-page omnibus spending bill approved by the House of Representatives yesterday. This $447 billion package does not require any of the tough choices that Americans are having to make every day in this difficult economy. Unfortunately, for the next generation of Americans, there will be severe consequences from our government's failure to control spending and the resulting huge increases in our national debt.

The Democrat leadership will soon try to raise our $12.1 trillion national debt limit by an additional $1.8 trillion. The Federal Government is mortgaging our Nation's future and its well-being to countries like China. The result of this spend-and-borrow approach is evident.

President Obama and Speaker Pelosi, show bold leadership and get our country back on track by cutting spending and reducing our country's debt, not by omnibus spending bills and debt ceiling increases.

Mr. Speaker, one in 10 Americans are without jobs this holiday season. This level of unemployment is the highest our country has seen in a quarter-century. In the midst of these difficult times, jobs are at the top of America's holiday wish list, yet the President has sent negotiators to Copenhagen to devise and deliver another job killer.

Negotiators from nations around the world convened in the Danish capital this week with the goal of developing a successor to the failed Kyoto Protocol, which sought to reduce worldwide greenhouse gas emissions. When Kyoto was negotiated, the Senate unanimously approved the Byrd-Hagel resolution. This important resolution established U.S. policy that our country would not enter into any climate treaty that leaves out developing nations or hurts the American economy. In passing the resolution, the Senate recognized the damage such an agreement would do to the U.S. economy.

The President and his negotiators would be wise to abide by these guidelines today, as any agreement reached in Copenhagen would likely be more devastating to the American economy than Kyoto. But it's not just Copenhagen that Americans have to worry about, the President wants to pursue an environmental agenda in any way he can, including through cap-and-trade. In my view, cap-and-trade, approved by the House of Representatives in June, remains one of the most damaging pieces of legislation ever passed by the House of Representatives during my time in Congress, especially as it affects agriculture and rural America.

The passage of a cap-and-trade bill will increase the cost of doing business in the United States, will force business owners to close their doors, and will cause companies to leave the country for locations where costs are lower.

The respected Heritage Foundation studied the Waxman-Markey cap-and- trade bill. The study showed that the legislation would result in annual losses to GDP of almost $400 billion and that it would lead to the loss of 1 million jobs.

At a House Agriculture Subcommittee on Conservation, Credit, Energy, and Research hearing last week, USDA's chief economist and other experts from universities across the Nation all testified that the costs for fuel, fertilizer and other business inputs would increase under cap-and-trade, meaning more harm to business and the people they employ.

For example, one witness cited an Energy Information Administration analysis that showed, in 2030, the Waxman-Markey bill would raise diesel fuel costs by 15 percent, electricity costs by 22 percent and industrial natural gas costs by 26 percent. The last thing we need is another law or treaty that dashes the hope for economic recovery and that destroys more jobs, but the President continues to push for just that.

On Monday, the EPA ruled that carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases are a danger to public health and to the environment. This decision means EPA can impose greenhouse gas regulations without Congressional action. This threat is no reason to pass cap-and-trade. We must defeat cap-and-trade in the Senate and then put an end to the faulty interpretation of the Clean Air Act by the EPA.

The President should refrain from entering into international agreements, and the EPA must be stopped from making decisions that are not supported by science or current law. At a time when so many Americans are without work, the President needs to focus on ways to create jobs and to improve the economy.

A cap-and-trade bill, EPA regulations, or an international treaty, all of which are on the President's holiday wish list, would be devastating to the U.S. economy. That's a holiday gift that no American can afford. The passage of cap-and-trade, an agreement in Copenhagen, clean air findings by the EPA--we can just as soon leave those presents under the Christmas tree unopened.

President Obama and Speaker Pelosi, don't be the grinch that steals our Christmas. And I hope that is not ``just the way it is.''

Mr. Chairman, I rise this evening, as one might expect, in my opposition to H.R. 4173 certainly as written, as the gentleman from Massachusetts says, this massive financial regulation bill.

Once again we have 1,200-plus pages, a so-called ``reform'' bill before the House of Representatives that would dramatically increase government involvement in our economy. If this Congress is serious about economic recovery, then we should be reducing burdensome regulations, not increasing them.

I have heard from many Kansans about their inability to access credit from their local community-based lending institutions. Small businesses and farmers rely upon these loans to make payroll, expand, and to make their ends meet. Local lending institutions would love nothing more than to make these loans, but the overly broad regulations and the inconsistency with which different examiners enforce those regulations, together with higher FDIC insurance premiums and increased reserve requirements, has greatly restricted family and small business access to capital. This House should be more focused on the credit crunch and helping institutions cut through the bureaucracy and lend money, not creating more layers of regulation.

Among the provisions I oppose within this legislation is the creation of a permanent TARP-like bailout authority. This authority will continue to shield large financial firms from their mistakes and pass those costs of their miscalculations on to the American taxpayer. The legislation takes an overly broad approach, disrupting markets that have performed well and placing more regulatory burdens into places where they are not needed.

One example of these changes that this legislation would make is the commodities futures market known as designated contract markets. These are not the over-the-counter derivatives markets you will hear most Members discuss during this debate. In the wake of last fall's financial collapse, these regulated contract markets performed relatively well under the current core principle regulatory regime. This regime allowed both regulators and exchanges the ability to adapt their regulatory approach to changing market conditions.

Rather than recognize the success, this legislation replaces those core principle regimes with an antiquated rules-based structure that has failed at the SEC. This legislation also redefines the definition of a bona fide hedging transaction in the contract markets so narrowly that it will be difficult for many commercial market participants to properly hedge their risk. These changes will hurt, not help, our economic recovery and introduce more, not less, volatility into the marketplace.

For these and many other reasons, I urge the House to reject this legislation.

Madam Speaker, farmers, ranchers, and other small businesses are the backbone of the Kansas economy. The ability to pass a business from one generation to the next is critical to a business's ongoing success. Rural America has enough trouble retaining a youthful workforce. The estate or ``death'' tax does not aid our efforts in promoting long term growth and curbing depopulation.

A major obstacle to the continuity of a business is the estate tax. I have long sought a permanent repeal of the estate tax. This tax comprises less than one percent of U.S. revenues, but poses a substantial impediment to the growth of family farms and small businesses. H.R. 4154, Permanent Estate Tax Relief for Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009, does not provide the necessary reforms. While the certainty provided by H.R. 4154 would be welcome, passage of this legislation reduced the chances to next to none that any significant changes will occur to estate taxes in the future. I have sponsored an alternative that, for a while, was expected to be brought to the House floor. While it does not do all that I would like; it is reasonable and continues to have the chance for broad bipartisan support.

While I will continue to look for ways to achieve a full repeal, I believe the next best alternative, given today's political and economic climate, is H.R. 3905, the Estate Tax Relief Act of 2009. H.R. 3905 will exempt, from the estate tax, estates worth $3.5 million in 2009, increase the exemption to $5 million by the year 2019, and index the exemption to inflation to allow it to automatically increase in the years following 2019. Enacting exemptions at these levels should prevent a majority of Kansas' small businesses from being affected by the tax. H.R. 3905 will also reduce the maximum tax rate, for estates in excess of the exemption, to 35 percent by the year 2019.

While I am encouraged to see the House's willingness to address this issue, I feel Congress has missed an opportunity. I could not support H.R. 4154 because I believe it did not sufficiently address the damaging consequences of the estate tax while limiting the chances that Congress will ultimately do so. It is apparent that the House is currently unwilling to consider a full repeal. Until Congress is ready for that discussion, I will continue to work for initiatives that alleviate financial pressure from our farmers, ranchers, and small business owners.

Madam Speaker, on the Kansas prairie, in a small town named Smith Center, an exceptional tradition has been built and maintained over the course of decades. The Redmen of Smith Center High School have achieved great things on the football field.

There are few, if any, high school football fans in Kansas who are unaware of Smith Center's reputation. The parents and boosters of Smith Center High School have watched with pride as their sons bested opponents on the gridiron in 79 consecutive contests. Coach Roger Barta and his Redmen football team have won over 300 games in the past 32 seasons. They've racked up eight State championships, five of them in a row.

Smith Center was on the longest active 11-man high school football winning streak in the Nation. The streak was snapped in the Kansas State 2-1A championship game 2 weeks ago. Every player on the Redman football squad, from freshman to senior, experienced their first high school defeat at the hands of the Centralia High School Panthers. It was a heartbreaking loss for an extraordinary group of boys.

I had the opportunity to participate in several pregame coin flips over the past few seasons, including this year's State title game. Each time I witnessed a very talented football team with a very spirited group of fans. Yet, all the success the team has enjoyed on the field has never been what makes them so remarkable. Football is just what attracts notoriety and our applause. It's the building of character and lifelong traits that matter in Smith Center. Following their first loss in 6 years, Coach Barta reminded his players, ``We've never judged ourselves on wins and losses.''

The truly exceptional work being done on the plains of Kansas is the development of character in the boys of the Smith Center football team and the students of Smith Center High School. It is the respect each athlete is taught by their coaches. It's the insistence of integrity insisted upon by their teachers. It's the values instilled in each son by their parents and community.

Joe Drape, a New York Times Sports writer, recently authored a book entitled, ``Our Boys: A Perfect Season on the Plains with the Smith Center Redmen.'' In his book, Mr. Drape extols the virtues we, in rural America, hold dear. Humility, sacrifice, unwavering commitment, all are characteristics that are exemplified by the Redmen and their fans. Additionally, as I was told by one of the game officials after the State title game, this is the only team that year after year, every game, they gather on the field, hold hands, and a prayer is offered by one of the coaches or one of the players on the team.

Redmen football is what received the attention, but behind the scenes is where the most impressive and longest lasting accomplishments are discovered. Football is simply a teaching tool used by the community. Coach Barta was quoted in the book as stating, ``None of this is really about football. What we're doing is sending kids into life who know that every day means something.''

This attitude exemplifies the teaching, coaching, and parenting philosophy of rural America. Our population may be dwindling and our communities aging, but our commitment to raising good children and preparing them for life after high school is something that will never diminish. School pride is important to a community, but it pales in comparison to the role a teacher, coach, or parent plays when he or she helps a child succeed. I'm thankful that Coach Barta and his staff understand this, and I'm thankful to come from a part of the country that understands this.

Congratulations to the Smith Center Redmen, their football team, for their remarkable success, and thanks to the team, the community, and the school that are such great ambassadors for our way of life on the plains of Kansas.

Mr. Speaker, I rise this evening in the House of Representatives to recognize a remarkable gift that will enhance the professional education of our country's military officers and thereby improve the safety and security of every American.

In November, Mr. Ross Perot of Texas pledged $6.1 million to support two new initiatives at the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College located at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas. At a time when our country is demanding so much from those in uniform, this significant contribution will ensure that America's military leaders receive the best education and training to accomplish their missions around the world.

Mr. Perot's contribution followed a recent visit to Fort Leavenworth. He experienced firsthand the classroom instruction that U.S. officers and their interagency and international counterparts receive at the Army's Command and General Staff College, our country's oldest and largest military staff college. He also met with students and toured the Lewis and Clark Center, an impressive new building completed in 2007 to house the college.

Mr. Perot's gift will fund a new center for interagency cooperation and a new chair of ethics. As the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan make clear, cooperation between military and other agencies is an important component for our country's success. To address this need, the Col. Arthur D. Simons Center for Study of Interagency Cooperation will enhance the cooperation of interagency affairs. The second initiative to be created, the Gen. Hugh Shelton Chair in Ethics, will attract world-class academics and researchers to stress the importance of ethics and values in the military.

You may notice that rather than naming these new programs after himself, Mr. Perot chose to name them after others. Col. Arthur ``Bull'' Simons led the 1970 Son Tay raid to free prisoners of war in Vietnam, as well as a 1979 mission to rescue, from a prison in Tehran, two of Mr. Perot's employees. Retired Army Gen. Hugh Shelton served as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and is a friend of Mr. Perot's. Mr. Perot selflessly named his initiatives after military members who have played an important role in his life and

defended our country's honor. This gesture is a testament to Ross Perot's character and patriotism.

I commend Mr. Perot for his generous and continued support for our Armed Forces. I also want to commend retired Colonel Bob Ulin, who, as CEO of the Command and General Staff College Foundation, was instrumental in securing this tremendous pledge and growing the foundation generally. Since its inception in 2005 as a not-for-profit to support the college, the foundation has offered many programs and activities to promote excellence, including awards for students and faculty, support for conferences and lectures, and community outreach activities.

For 128 years, the Command and General Staff College at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, has served as the ``intellectual heart of the Army,'' producing numerous world and military leaders. The next Marshall, Eisenhower, or Petraeus may very well be sitting in a classroom in Leavenworth, Kansas, today.

We are grateful to Ross Perot, an American patriot, for his support of our men and women who protect and defend our Nation by their service in the United States military, and we are grateful for Fort Leavenworth, Kansas.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in memory of William Avery, former Governor and Congressman from the state of Kansas. Governor Avery passed away November 4th at the age of 98 in his home state that he served in so many ways. Prior to his passing, he was the oldest living former member of Congress. A lifelong Kansan, Governor Avery deserves to be celebrated as a fine public servant and a good man.

A native of Wakefield, Kansas, he returned to the family farm after graduating from the University of Kansas. Then, Governor Avery did what many young men of his generation did. He left the family farm to serve his country in World War II as a pilot. This would be only the first act of service in what would prove to be a distinguished career serving the people of not only Kansas, but the nation.

Following his service on his local school board, Governor Avery served four years in the Kansas House of Representatives. This preceded his decade long career representing Kansas in the House of Representatives. Governor Avery then added to his already impressive resume by becoming Kansas' 37th Governor serving in 1965 and '66. While he served only one, two-year term, Governor Avery made a series of indelible marks on the cultural and political landscape of Kansas. Governor Avery would see his political career come to a final close following an election loss to Bob Dole in a GOP Senatorial primary.

Today, we see an increasing number of public officials who have lost touch with their constituencies. They move to Washington or their respective state capitals and become someone other than the person who was originally elected. Governor Avery was certainly not one of those men. He was simply a farmer and rancher that was entrusted with providing for the wellbeing of his state and nation. Public servants would do well to use this man as a model for their own service. A true man of the people whose heart stayed on the farm on which he was raised. Yet unselfish enough to leave to serve his state and nation when called upon to do so.

A statesman and a gentleman who pursued the right ends regardless of their popularity, Governor Avery would have undoubtedly had a lifelong political career had he focused on the politically expedient choices rather than the choices that would benefit Kansas. That type of courage is, unfortunately, often a rarity in today's leadership. Yes, the family and friends of Governor Avery have lost an important part of their lives. But everyone who has ever held an elected office in this nation has lost a role model of the highest caliber.

My thoughts and prayers are with the family of Governor Avery during this time of mourning. His children William Avery, Jr., Brad Avery, Barbara Avery, and Sue Avery along with their families have much to be proud of. I am thankful for his service and honored to call him my fellow Kansan.

Mr. Speaker, the Pelosi health care bill creates 111 new bureaucracies and it only cuts one program: Medicare.

I chair the Rural Health Care Coalition. I care about health care especially as it affects rural States, rural

Americans like Kansans. And I have concluded that this bill will not make health care more affordable or more accessible for rural America. The standard by which I judge this is not a Republican plan or a Democrat plan, but what is good and right for America.

I've concluded that coupled with all the other bad ideas of this Congress--stimulus packages, bailouts, Cash for Clunkers, cap-and- trade--we will be leaving our children with more debt, less freedom, diminished personal responsibility, and fewer economic opportunities. Worse, we will have failed to honor the dreams for a better life for another generation of Americans. This I will not, cannot support.

Mr. Speaker, after reviewing H.R. 3962, the Affordable Health Care for America Act, listening to the concerns of Kansans, and visiting Kansas hospitals to speak with doctors, nurses, patients, and administrators, I have concluded that this bill will be harmful to Kansas and I strongly oppose it. However, I do believe the sections relating to the creation of a market for biosimilar products is one area of the bill that strikes the appropriate balance in providing lower cost options to patients without destroying a healthy and functioning industry in this country. These provisions were one of the few areas in the bill adopted on an overwhelming bipartisan vote for the Eshoo-Inslee-Barton, EIB amendment in the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

Creating a pathway for new products that does not destroy the ability or the incentives for innovator companies to develop breakthrough technologies and, at the same time providing a safe and effective way to bring competition to benefit patients and encourage treatments, is a necessary objective. New biosimilars have the potential to fundamentally change the course of many diseases. We need to promote patient safety and ensure incentives to encourage the continued development of a critical weapon to fight diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's and cancer. I wish we could remove these specific provisions from H.R. 3962 and consider them separately because it would most likely pass with the kind of overwhelming bipartisan support.

However, these provisions are only the first step in a long path to the marketing of these new biosimilar products. New research and clinical testing will have to occur and the FDA will implement regulations that will ensure this research is done safely and effectively. Biopharmaceuticals represent a tremendous growth opportunity for our burgeoning bioscience industry in Kansas, and we need to work to see that new biotechnology products continue to reach patients and medical professionals.

As this new biosimilar market develops in the United States, we need to ensure that we foster innovative products in this country for the creation of jobs and research that will go into determining whether these products are interchangeable with the innovator's products. Testing and research on these interchangeable biosimilar products should occur in this country to ensure that it is done properly and safely and to benefit our patients and our economy.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Stupak- Pitts Amendment to H.R. 3962, Speaker Pelosi's health care reform bill. This amendment would maintain the current policy of preventing federal funding for abortion and for health benefits packages that include abortion. I feel a special obligation to protect innocent, young life.

I recently sponsored H. Con. Res. 169, legislation urging members of Congress to eliminate taxpayer-funded abortions from any proposed health care reform package. Directing taxpayer dollars to fund abortions is a clear violation of many Americans' deeply held beliefs and Americans should not be forced to compromise their core moral beliefs as a means to health care reform. Additionally, on September 28, 2009, I urged Speaker Pelosi and Democratic leadership, along with 182 of my House colleagues, to allow members of the House to vote their consciences with regard to abortion and health care reform by allowing consideration of an amendment to prohibit government funding of abortion.

This week, I had the honor of meeting 30 Kansas World War II veterans at the national World War II Memorial. These veterans, who are in their 80s and 90s, were part of Honor Flight, an organization that brings veterans to Washington, D.C. to see the memorial dedicated in their honor.

Welcoming these Honor Flight veterans is an incredible privilege and one of the most rewarding experiences of my time in Congress. As I visited with these veterans about the sacrifices they made, the friends they lost, and the love they have for their country, I was reminded about how serious my responsibility is as a Member of the United States House of Representatives to do right. It also caused me to reflect on the importance of this weekend's vote on health care reform.

As Chair of the House Rural Health Care Coalition, I know how important health care is to the survival of Kansans and their home towns. The vote we will take this weekend will affect all Kansans at every age, those proud aging veterans, the senior couple counting out their medications each morning, the young family just starting out, the children playing hide and seek in the yard, and the small business owner looking over the budget report.

The decision we make this weekend matters; it matters from coast to coast and across the sweeping plains of Kansas. Our State has unique health care needs, different from much of the country. We have an aging population that has spread widely across a large area. I consider these unique needs in each policy decision that I make.

Changes are truly needed in our current health care system, and I have written about my ideas for reform and have shared them with folks back home and anyone up here who will listen. After studying H.R. 3962, Speaker Pelosi's health care reform bill, listening to the concerns of Kansans and visiting with Kansas hospitals to speak with doctors and nurses, patients and administrators, I have concluded that the Speaker's 2,000-page bill will do great harm to Kansans, and I strongly oppose it.

The Pelosi bill is essentially the same version that the Speaker started out with months ago, except it's 1,000 pages longer. Instead of working to repair our current system, which a majority of Americans favor, the Pelosi bill will turn much of our system on its head by creating a new government-sponsored health care program financed by deficit spending and taxes.

This bill levies taxes on businesses, cuts Medicare benefits to seniors, eliminates jobs with employer mandates, and enables bureaucrats to define what form of health coverage is acceptable for Americans.

The bill would create 118 new boards, bureaucracies, commissions and programs to carry out its so-called ``reforms.'' I am especially troubled how $500 billion in Medicare cuts and proposed reimbursement rate changes contained in this bill will affect Kansans with our high population of seniors. Only in Washington does cutting billions of dollars from a near bankrupt Medicare program seem like a good idea. These cuts will reduce benefits and raise premiums for Kansas seniors and make it harder for us to find a doctor or nurse when we need one.

We strengthen our health care system by reducing cost. The Speaker's bill does nothing to reduce cost. In fact, Medicare and Medicaid's own actuaries have warned that the plan will dramatically increase Federal health care spending.

The veterans I met at the World War II Memorial fought for a country they love and that country's promise of liberty and opportunity. After the war, these men and women returned to their homes and ventured off in different directions, some rejoined families and jobs, some got married, some went to college, and some started a business. But one thing they all shared was the desire to continue fighting to make a better life for their children, a life better than the one they had for themselves. This is the desire that my mom and dad--my dad who turns 94 tomorrow--had for my sister and me, and the one that my wife, Robba, and I have for our daughters. This is what we do in America: we leave the next generation better off.

I have concluded this bill will not make health care more affordable or more accessible to Kansans. I have also concluded that, coupled with all the other bad ideas of this Congress--stimulus packages, bailouts, Cash for Clunkers, cap-and-trade--we will be leaving our children with more debt, less freedom, diminished personal responsibility, and fewer economic opportunities. Worse, we will have failed to honor the dreams of those Kansas soldiers for a better life for another generation of Americans.

Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I appreciate the chance to be on the House floor today to speak in opposition to this bill, and I am particularly delighted to speak after the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Boswell) has just spoken because my message to my colleagues on the Agriculture Committee and others from rural America, whether Republicans or Democrats, is this is

a bad bill for rural America and for our agriculture producers and the small businesses that support agriculture in rural America.

While it is a noble effort and something that I think everyone on the House floor would agree on, we need to move in the direction of greater security in regard to chemicals. Aspects of this bill, as indicated by the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Barton), really do not relate to security. They are about employee safety, workforce safety, the environment in which we work. It is about environmental rules and regulations. And in some fashion in our legislative process here, the Department of Homeland Security issues have been overcome, the positives that may be there from increasing our security, are overcome by the detrimental costs associated with environmental and labor issues.

So this bill, particularly because of the IST provisions, is a bill that is detrimental. As Mr. Boswell indicated, increasing input costs-- fertilizers, chemicals, pesticides--those things matter to production agriculture today, especially today when the economic circumstances in which our farmers find themselves is so narrow, so difficult, anything that increases the cost is very damaging.

Finally, the businesses that support them, they make up a huge component of rural communities across my State, across rural America and across our country, and putting those folks out of business has a significant consequence to the future of the people that I represent.

So I urge my colleagues from all across rural America to oppose this legislation for the dramatic and damaging effect it will have upon the people who produce food and fiber in this country and the businesses that support that effort.

Mr. Speaker, I was unavoidably detained on Tuesday, November 3, and consequently missed rollcall vote No. 835 on H.R. 3949, the Veterans' Small Business Assistance and Servicemembers Protection Act of 2009. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea'' on H.R. 3949.

Mr. Speaker, I support changing and improving our health care delivery system, and there is a lot that can be done. Unfortunately, H.R. 3962, the Speaker's health care bill, does too much and too much wrong.

This nearly 2,000-page bill will create 111 new government boards, bureaucracies, and commissions. Additionally, the bill uses the word ``shall,'' which is the government's way of saying people must do something, a whopping 3,425 times.

Instead of turning our entire health care system on its head and increasing government, we need to implement reforms that eliminate unnecessary costs in our system. Further, history shows that a government-run health care plan will be way more expensive than what is estimated today. The experience with health care entitlement programs is that they end up costing so

much more than ever thought. In 1967, experts predicted that the then- new Medicare program would cost $12 billion in 1990. Actual Medicare spending in 1990 was $110 billion.

Instead of growing government, increasing bureaucracy, and creating more requirements, we must invest in wellness and prevention and promote cost savings and personal responsibility. All of that will improve opportunities for Americans.