Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, it is my honor today to pay tribute to former Auglaize County Commissioner Ivo Kramer of Wapakoneta, Ohio. Ivo retired at the end of 2008 after twelve years of outstanding service to the people of Auglaize County.

Ivo was first elected to the Board of Commissioners in 1997 following a distinguished 40-year career with the United States Department of Agriculture's Soil Conservation Service (later renamed the Natural Resources

Conservation Service) and the Auglaize County Soil and Water Conservation District. He was recognized repeatedly for his dedicated efforts to preserve our natural resources, receiving outstanding performance awards from the SCS and The Ohio State University.

Ivo's colleagues recently paid tribute to his 52 years in public service, citing his longstanding support of economic growth and responsible land use practices throughout the county. The experience and knowhow he brought to bear on issues facing Auglaize County will not soon be replaced.

As is to be expected from such a dedicated public servant, Ivo looks forward to getting involved in volunteer work during his retirement. I know that his devotion to volunteerism will be an outstanding model and an inspiration to others.

I am proud to join the Auglaize County Board of Commissioners and the people of Auglaize County in congratulating Ivo on his distinguished public service career. We wish Ivo and his wife of 50 years, Camille, and their entire family every success as they move to a new chapter in their lives.

I appreciate the gentleman for putting this Special Order hour together. This must be the Ohio hour because I notice the last two presiding officers over the Chamber were Ohioans as well, and then of course my friend from just north of our district, Congressman Latta and his expertise in this.

Think about the average family, what they saw from their government last week. I think it's an important place to start as we think about this discussion.

The typical family, what did they see from their government? They saw the United States Senate confirm for Secretary of the Treasury a gentleman who didn't pay his taxes on time. Think about it, not just any Cabinet position but Secretary of the Treasury. Then they saw from the House of Representatives, the other side of Congress, they saw the House of Representatives pass a stimulus package that will not do anything to foster and promote economic growth. I mean, that's your government at work, America, certainly not where we need to be.

Think about this stimulus package that we've been talking about and what it doesn't mean for promoting economic growth now and what it means, long-term implications for our kids and grandkids and the debt that it preserves.

First thing is this, and my colleague, our colleague from Louisiana I think said it right. The American people get it. They have figured out that this, quote, stimulus package is not what our country needs at this particular time. They don't like the process that was used and, frankly, the lack of process, the lack of the fact that the Republicans weren't included, and they don't like the finished product, the finished product that has such things in it like $600 million for the government to buy a new fleet of automobiles.

I'd much rather cut taxes so that families can use that tax money, their tax money, to purchase their own car versus giving more cars to the bureaucrats who work here in Washington.

So they don't like the process. They don't like the product. And I think they also understand, which was being pointed out very well by our friend and colleague from Ohio, Congressman Latta, they understand that this spending spree that has grabbed Washington over the last several months is just wrong to do to future generations of Americans. It is wrong to saddle our kids and our grandkids with this kind of debt, the kind of debt that Congressman Latta was pointing out and I know Congressman Akin has pointed out earlier in the hour.

Think about this. We're going to run a deficit this fiscal year approaching 10 percent of gross domestic product. Never in the history of this country have we run that kind of debt. You have to go back to World War II when we're fighting a world war to when it's close to 6 percent of GDP. This year it looks like it's going to be close to 10 percent of gross domestic product.

They understand that's not the direction to go. They understand that what really fosters economic growth is reducing the tax burden on families, on taxpayers, on small business owners so they can keep more of their money, put it to work in the private sector, put it to work in their small business, creating jobs, protecting jobs, and promoting economic growth for the future. That's where we need to focus.

Short-term, fast-acting tax relief versus big government spending. The American people understand tax relief is where we need to go. That's the alternative we've been supporting. That's the alternative we'll continue to support. And the good news is, that's what the Senate is beginning to look at.

We did a press conference today with some of the Senate Republicans, and they are talking about focusing on some of the same tax cut provisions we tried to get in the bill over here on the House side.

I appreciate the gentleman yielding.

My colleague said earlier that if big Federal Government spending was going to get us out of this mess it would have happened a long time ago because we've certainly been doing that. And you're exactly right. The easiest thing in the world to do for politicians, for policy-makers, for Members of Congress is to spend money. It's the easy thing to do.

The tough thing to do is the discipline thing to do. I had an old coach in high school and he talked about discipline every day in practice. And his definition was this. Discipline is doing what you don't want to do when you don't want to do it. It meant doing it his way when you'd rather do it your way, but it left an impression on me.

And frankly, the disciplined thing to do is to say we're going to stop this excessive spending; we're going to reduce the tax burden here so that business owners and families can have more of their money and promote economic growth and do the things that we know work in an economy. That's what we have to focus on and have the discipline to say we're not going to continue to spend and spend and spend and mortgage our kids' and grandkids' future.

I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank him for his many years of work on behalf of the pro-life cause and his work with the Pro-Life Caucus, in the bipartisan Pro-Life Caucus, here in Congress.

I just want to say quickly three thank you's to the thousands of people who will be here tomorrow and to the millions of pro-life people across this country: Thank you for getting involved in this most important issue about the sanctity of human life.

I spoke Sunday night back in our district to a banquet for a women's center in the town of Bell Fountain, Ohio, and I told them the same thing, thanking them for their effort in this cause for so many years, but also specifically I thanked them for two other things.

First, I thanked them for taking the risk. There is always risk associated with stepping into public life and advocating for something so important. There is risk associated with getting off the sidelines and getting in the game to try to make a difference. We know that many times those in the press don't always give us a fair shake on this issue.

I am always reminded of Cal Thomas, a guy who was pro-life and a syndicated columnist, Cal Thomas, and what he said when he was talking about how sometimes the press doesn't always give us a fair shake. And he had a great line. He said, ``I get up every morning; I read my Bible and the New York Times so I can see what each side is up to.'' And there is certainly some truth to that. We understand the risk that people take when they step forward and advocate for this, but the risk is worth taking, because this issue is so important.

And the last thing I would say to, again, the thousands who are going to

be here tomorrow and the millions of pro-life people across this country, for the work you have done for years to help protect human life and protect the unborn, stay positive. I see the difference you make when you get a chance to talk with the folks who have helped these women's centers across the country, these crisis pregnancy centers across the country. They are so positive, when they can help a young lady who is in this position, help her with her unborn child and help her through the whole pregnancy. Stay positive. Positive people get things done; negative people are negative. Positive people accomplish things of meaning and significance; negative people are negative. Positive people accomplish real things, and they help a lot of other people accomplish them as well. So stay positive.

I will finish with this, Congressman. I am reminded of the story from Scripture we are all familiar with where the Israelites were camped against the Philistines, and every day the Philistine giant would walk out and issue the challenge: Who would fight Goliath? The Israelites' response was: He is so big, we can never defeat him. But David's response was: He is so big, I can't miss. And that is the attitude that pro-life people have had for over 30 years and that is the attitude that is ultimately going to allow us to win in this country and some day protect every single human being and make sure that unalienable right that our Founders talked about really applies to every single American.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of the resolution.

Look, we all know the facts. We've got a $10 trillion national debt. I believe last November the Treasury Department reported that we ran the largest single monthly deficit in American history. From 1789 to 1987 we accumulated $2 trillion in national debt. This fiscal year, and last fiscal year we will add $2 trillion. So what it took us 200 years to do, we've done in 2 years.

This is a good first step, something we need to do. And we need to look at every single line item in the Federal budget, every single agency. And so I want to applaud both parties and the President-elect for bringing this forward.

I gave a speech the other night back home in Ohio and I said to the group, I said, who's going to bail out the bailout? And everyone kind of looked at me because they get it. They understand it's going to be the American taxpayer. Worse yet, it's going to be future American taxpayers, our kids and our grandkids. And so it's important that we do everything we can to look at where there's waste, where there's redundancy, where there's fraud, where there's crazy things in the Federal Government that we need to get a handle on and reduce spending so we can help families in the future and continue this great country that we call America.

Look, we all know we are in a tough economic situation, and the gentleman from Missouri has explained some of the reasons we got there. The question is, where are you going to look for the solution? Are you going to look to the government, the big Federal Government which, as the gentleman has pointed out, has already run up deficit after deficit. We are approaching an $11 trillion national debt.

So you are going to look to the same government that helped get us in the problem, or you are going to look to the people, not the economy, the people. It's the American taxpayer, American family, the American small business owner who can get us out of that situation we are in. That's who we should trust.

What we should do, is instead of spending and spending more, we should look for ways to reduce the tax burden, something we know that works every single time it's tried. When you let families, when you let small business owners, when you let the entrepreneurial spirit of the American people have more of their money to use it, to invest it, to put it back into their business, to put it into those things that have meaning and significance to them and their family, good things happen in your economy.

That's where our focus should be, and, frankly, that's the proposal we want to talk about a little bit later that we, the Republican Study Committee, unveiled today.

Yes, because, look, the other approach hasn't worked and hasn't worked in recent history. This bailout fever, as the gentleman from Colorado alluded to, this bailout fever that's grabbed Washington, we know that doesn't work. We have seen what's happened with the trillions of dollars we have spent.

There are all kinds of reasons we shouldn't continue down this road. So we know that doesn't work. What we do know works is letting families, letting taxpayers, letting small business owners keep more of their money investing back in their business and helping our economy.

I think it is important to also understand the gravity of this. Not only the bailouts haven't worked, but we have to understand how much in debt we are. We are getting into unprecedented levels of national debt.

Exactly. We are approaching $11 trillion of national debt. The deficit we will run up in this fiscal year and last fiscal year, the last 2 years, $2 trillion we are going to add to the national debt. That is equal to what it took us from 1789 to 1987 to accumulate. So in 2 years we have accumulated as much, added to the national debt what it took us 200 years to get to.

As we have done in the last 2 years.

The month of November, we ran the largest single monthly deficit in history, $164 billion for one month. This is serious.

It didn't cost that much.

It is unprecedented. There are several reasons why we shouldn't go down this bailout road, I call it this bailout fever that has grabbed Washington. First and foremost, once you start, it is hard to stop. Everybody gets in line. We have seen it. Every single business now has their hand out. We had the governors and mayors that people talked about earlier this evening.

The second reason, as the gentleman from Louisiana pointed out, it doesn't work. We have seen what happened with the first $350 billion in the TARP program.

The third reason, the most compelling reason in my judgment, it is immoral. It is wrong to do this to our kids and grandkids. It is wrong to saddle this kind of debt to our children and grandchildren, future generations of Americans.

One of the things that makes this country special, that made America great, is the concept that parents make sacrifices for their kids so that they have life a little better than they did, and they in turn do it for the next generation and they in turn do it for the next, and we get to be the greatest country that there ever was.

The fourth reason is it is unfair. And I think we miss this sometimes. It is unfair that taxpayers bail out certain businesses. And the small business owner back home, he is not going to get help, she is not going to get help to run that small business.

More importantly, for those industries that are getting help from the government, that are getting help from the taxpayers, it is unfair to their competitors within that same industry who don't get help.

So there are all kinds of reasons why we shouldn't do this, but chief among them, chief among them is the idea that it is wrong to saddle future generations of Americans with this kind of debt. I have said many times to folks back home, who is going to bail out the bailout?

Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Republican Conference standards on earmarks, I submit the following information regarding a project included at my request in H.R. 2638, the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act of 2009:

Requesting Member: Congressman Jim Jordan. (OH-04).

Bill: H.R. 2638.

Account: Army Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation (RDT&E)-- Combat Vehicle and Automotive Advanced Technology.

Requesting entity: Joint Systems Manufacturing Center, 1161 Buckeye Road, Lima, OH.

Project title: N-STEP-Enabled Manufacturing Cell for Future Combat Systems.

Description: With Federal assistance in fiscal years 2005 and 2006, the Government-owned Joint Systems Manufacturing Center in Lima, OH, developed a friction appurtenance welding cell to automate the many hundreds of individual welds required in large combat vehicle manufacturing. The $2.4 million included in H.R. 2638 will help perfect this technology for current and Future Combat Systems production, reducing the cost to the Government for vehicle procurement.

I thank the gentleman for yielding. And I'll be real brief. I appreciate you putting this together. And I just wanted to say congratulations and thank you to our three retirees for all your years of outstanding public service. And you know, I've only had the privilege of serving with these three individuals for 20 months, but each of them, in their own way have been helpful to me. Friendship is there, and I appreciate that.

And I really appreciate Congressman Hobson, who used to be my congressman, used to have Champaign County for several years. But his help in so many ways, in particular, navigating the defense appropriations process has been extremely helpful.

So congratulations; my best to each and every one of you. And thank you again for what you've done for the Buckeye State and for our country.

Madam Speaker, I rise to commend to the House the memory of Mr. Milton H. Weyer, Jr., on his passing of May 29, 2008. A lifelong Ohioan, Milton was born in Findlay on April 19, 1947. He led a life dedicated to service and helping others, serving for 4 years in the Air Force and for 27 years at Hanco as an emergency medical technician. His legacy of selflessness is fondly remembered by all those in his community and by those whose lives he touched.

Milton is survived by his wife Suzanne; his 5 children, Milton III, Marcus, Mallory, Drew, and Samantha; his siblings Bob, Donnie, Dave, Ray, and Charlotte; as well as 11 grandchildren.

I ask my colleagues to remember the Weyer family in their prayers and to honor all of those who provide service to their communities and to our Nation.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to commend Dr. Howard Koch of Lima, OH, to the House of Representatives as Ohio's 2008 Outstanding Older Worker.

Eighty-four years young, Dr. Koch performed general dentistry for 45 years. After selling his practice, he has continued to perform denture work for the past 12 years. About his life's work, Dr. Koch stated, ``Work--it's not really work. I like what I do and when you like what you do, it's not work.''

Dr. Koch has many accomplishments to his name from his distinguished career. In the 1960s, he co-chaired a committee to have fluoride added to Lima's water supply. He also made the first mouthguards for area football players. He has served as president of the Northwest Ohio Dental Association.

Though Dr. Koch has enjoyed a wonderful career, he did not always intend to be a dentist. He served as a bombardier during World War II and attained the rank of Second Lieutenant. He originally planned to be a teacher after serving in the military but changed his mind and entered the field of dentistry.

Though he keeps busy with his denture practice, Dr. Koch enjoys spending his free time cooking and baking homemade bread. He also enjoys dabbling in photography. He and his wife Patricia have been married for 63 years.

Madam Speaker, I take great pride today in recognizing Ohio's 2008 Outstanding Older Worker, Dr. Howard Koch.

Mr. Speaker, America is the greatest Nation in history with the greatest economy in history, a $14 trillion annual economy. To remain the number one economy, we need a real energy plan, not a sham. To help families across this country, we need a real energy plan, not a sham.

Here is the Democrat plan: no real offshore drilling; no drilling in ANWR; no nuclear power; no lawsuit abuse reform; no revenue sharing with the States. But you know what is in the plan, tax increases. Think about that. At a time when we want our economy to grow, they are raising taxes. At a time when we need more oil, they are going to tax the very people who produce the oil.

This is a terrible plan. It doesn't help our economy stay number one. It won't help American families, and that is why we should vote ``no'' on the Democrat plan and support the Republican plan that does the right things for our country.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6842, and in support of the Childers amendment, I support the amendment for three reasons, first it's just basic respect for the second amendment. The founders got it right when they put the second amendment right after the first.

Our founders understood how important this principle was in ensuring our basic freedoms in a constitutional republic.

I want to support the Childers amendment also for the fact that it respects the Supreme Court decision in the Heller case. This bill, in its current form, would allow for restrictions and regulations to be imposed that run contrary to the expressed opinion in that court decision.

When given the chance to implement commonsense legislation that protects the second amendment rights and respected the Supreme Court, the D.C. City Council instead enacted an emergency bill, completely in defiance of the Court, that banned most semiautomatic pistols, the firearm most often used by families to defend themselves.

They banned operable firearms in the home, requiring an individual to assemble and load and fire them only after an attack is under way and instituted costly and intrusive and convoluted registration process.

Finally, the last reason, I think, that the Childers amendment makes so much sense, is it's just good common sense. As the individual from Indiana pointed out, criminals aren't stupid, they are just bad.

Bad guys aren't dumb, they are just bad, and here is the dynamic that is at work. If you have a bad guy, a bad guy out there on the street trying to figure out which home he is going to rob some night, and there are two adjacent properties side by side. In one driveway is a pickup truck with a gun rack and a bumper sticker that says, ``I love the NRA'' and ``Palin for President.''

In the very next driveway, you have a Volkswagen with a Greenpeace bumper sticker and, respectfully, ``Waxman for President'' bumper sticker as well, which place do you think he is going to target for a crime?

That's the dynamics that is at work here. Criminals now have to stop and think, as previous speakers have pointed out, about this family may, in fact, be now able to exercise their second amendment rights to protect themselves, their family and their property.

That's the basic fundamental constitutional right we want to protect with the Childers amendment. That's why I oppose the underlying bill and support the amendment.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in strong support of this important resolution. Today we pause to remember nearly 3,000 who were killed, and thousands more who were injured, on that fateful morning 7 years ago. We remember the unspeakable evil we saw that morning, the terror that confronted us on our own shores. But we also remember the heroism of countless ordinary Americans who did extraordinary things that tragic day and in the weeks and months that followed.

Like the firefighters, paramedics, police officers, and other first responders who rushed into crumbling burning buildings, risking and giving their lives to do their duty and to save others, and, of course, the millions of Americans who gathered in church to pray, in communities centers and schools to organize relief for victims, and lined up around the corners to give blood. When evil confronted America that day, we did not flinch, we did not back down, and we did not surrender.

In the 7 years that have passed since that day, our Nation has remained on offense against the threat of radical Islamic extremism. It is a struggle that will define our generation and shape the next American century. We did not choose this battle, but we will meet it, as Americans always have, and we must be victorious.

I would again like to express my gratitude to the United States Armed Forces. Hundreds of thousands of soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines have answered the call of their country in her hour of need. They and their families have made countless sacrifices. Over 4,500 have given what President Lincoln called the fullest measure of devotion to their country. As long as this threat exists and Americans troops are deployed in harm's way, they must have the full support of this Congress. On this day when we look back and remember, let us gain strength from the examples of bravery and courage we have seen over the last 7 years. We must honor the legacy of the fallen and stand united against the continued threats to our country.

I ask my colleagues to join me in renewing our commitment to these principles that have made us the home of the brave and will continue to keep us the home of the free.

I thank the gentleman for putting this hour together. I thank the folks who are participating and those who were able to go on our trip when we went to, we were up in ANWR, up in Alaska to see.

You know, the thing I just feel so strongly about is, Americans realize we live in the greatest country ever. But they are frustrated. They are frustrated by the fact that this Congress, if you saw the news yesterday, this Congress has run the largest deficit in history. $482 billion is the projected deficit this year.

They are frustrated that this Congress won't act on increasing the supply of energy, won't act on drilling more offshore, drilling more in Alaska, won't act on bringing down the price at the pump, bringing down the price of energy, won't act on those things that are necessary to help every single family across this country.

A few months ago, in our district, I had the opportunity to be in one of our Federal judge's courtroom for the ceremony where new Americans take the oath of citizenship. And I don't know if you have ever had a chance to participate in those ceremonies, Madam Speaker, but when you get an opportunity, it is an emotional experience to watch these, in my case, it was 36 new Americans, raise their hand, take the oath and become an American citizen. And when they completed that oath, the smile on their face, when they now realized that they were a citizen of the greatest country in the world, it is special to see. And frankly, those Americans, those new Americans, as all Americans, deserve better from their Congress.

The idea that we are going to leave here without taking an up or down vote on increasing supply on drilling offshore, on drilling in ANWR, is just wrong, and they deserve better.

One of the things that we learned that the gentleman from California has pointed out in some of his comments and remarks, when we were in Alaska, I will just be frank with you. If ever there was a place that we should be producing oil, it is in ANWR. Alaska is a beautiful State, except in ANWR where we were. When you went and looked across that area, this was a desolate, barren place that has over 10 billion barrels of oil waiting to be brought to production, waiting to be helping with our supply needs, waiting to be helping with the price at the pump that families are paying, and it is just something that we need to go do.

And as the gentleman points out, technology is our friend in this area. The footprint needed now on the surface to go down and get a much larger area subsurface is so small, and we can do it in an environmentally safe way.

I thought it was interesting, and my colleagues will recall this as well who were on the trip, that we flew over ANWR in propeller planes, prop planes, so we were flying pretty low to the ground. When we flew over ANWR I didn't see any wildlife. I am sure it was there, but I just thought it was sort of ironic and somewhat of a coincidence. We didn't see it. As I told the press, we didn't see caribou, we didn't see, you know, polar bears. We didn't see Bambi. We didn't see it. What we saw was a barren, desolate place which, as I said, has over 10 billion barrels of oil that needed to be brought to market.

But when we were on the ground, as the gentleman from California pointed out, in the Prudhoe Bay area, in that production are, where we have been taking oil out of the ground, bringing it to market for 30 years, when we were on the ground there in that area, at the pipeline itself, mile marker 0, pump station Number 1, we saw the caribou. They were right there. In fact, we saw one caribou trotting across the airport runway where we landed the plane as we flew into the Prudhoe Bay area.

So the idea that we can produce this in a way that is going to be friendly to wildlife, it is already there. We saw proof of that firsthand. This is something we need to do.

As I said, the American people get it, and the fact that their Congress doesn't is frustrating. It is frustrating them. It is frustrating for those of us who want to drill more, who want this legislation to pass so we can get started on bringing down the price right away.

They get it. And I am confident what is going to happen over the August recess, you know, is there is an old line in politics that most politicians don't see the light; they feel the heat. And I think when some of these Members go back home, they are not just going to feel the heat from the August summer weather, they are going to feel the heat from families and constituents back home who tell them, we need to drill; we need to go get more supply.

The American people get it. It is time that this Democrat-led Congress get it. I am still confident we can get a vote on this before the election, hopefully, when we come back in September, and we are going to continue to push on that.

And with that I would yield back to my good friend, the gentleman from California.

Will the gentleman yield?

One of the arguments we hear is just what the gentleman brought up, it is going to take 8 to 10 years to bring this production. We forget about the fact that, as you indicated, ANWR is only 70, 75 miles away from the existing pipeline. We have already got that infrastructure in place.

And as the gentleman indicated earlier, it used to be 2 million barrels a day moving through that pipeline. Today it is 700,000. If it gets to a certain level, it drops to a certain low level, it becomes physically, the feasibility physically is just not there to continue to maintain it. And frankly, from an economic standpoint, there needs to be a certain volume of oil moving through that every day.

This place is right next door, 75 miles away. And the infrastructure is in place. It will take a lot less time to get that oil to market and help every single family.

Will the gentleman yield?

I just want to ask the gentleman a question. He comes from Louisiana.

Isn't it true that the oil production facilities offshore in your State in the gulf that during Katrina, that terrible disaster that hit our country, hit your State so hard, but isn't it true those production facilities withstood that hurricane and there was no spill, no environmental hazard whatsoever during that entire storm?

Today in the Budget Committee we had a hearing today where we were talking about the increased price in food. We had two economists that were a part of the panel, and I asked them how much--you think about the fact that every commodity price is up. I asked them, I said, How much of all of these other commodity prices, the price being driven up, is attributable to the price of fuel? And they couldn't give a percentage, but they said it's a lot.

And it's not just a lot. When you think about the farmer and the fact that his input costs and just putting diesel in the tractor to plant the crops and harvest and cultivate the crops, but it's all our distribution. You have got to move all of these products that my friend from Tennessee listed, that my friend from Georgia talked about in agriculture. You have got to move them across this country.

Fuel drives up every single other commodity price, and that's why, again, it highlights and underscores the fact that we have got to pass legislation that allows us to get more supply.

I thank the gentleman.

Madam Speaker, I rise to join my colleagues today in opposition to taxpayer funding of Planned Parenthood, and I particularly want to thank Congressman Smith for his long-time leadership on this most important issue, as well as Mr. Pence for his introduction of the legislation that will do just what we've been talking about this evening.

Let me just reiterate a few of the numbers that the gentlelady from Minnesota pointed out. Planned Parenthood had over $1 billion in revenue last year, $115 million in profit, $952 million in net assets. That's bad enough, I mean, that they're using our tax dollars to fund a practice that is wrong, that is immoral.

But add to it this fact--and I want to cite and the gentlelady did this as well--cite The Wall Street Journal article where Planned Parenthood talks about the fact that they're going to raise $10 million to fund their political action committee.

So to just put it into plain language, think about what's going on here in this practice. Planned Parenthood is using your tax dollars to raise more money to run against your candidate to elect someone who will give them more tax dollars. Stated even more simply, using your tax money to run against you and run against the candidates you want to support, those pro-life candidates. That's what they're doing. They want to keep electing people that will keep this process going forward.

This is just wrong, and it should stop. And the gentleman from Texas was so right when he talks about those pregnancy resource centers, those crisis pregnancy centers out there who are doing the bake sales. Our church, we help support one where they give each family a bottle and you fill it up with coins and you stuff a few dollars, raising money just any way they can to protect human life because they understand it's sacred. They understand it's precious. Contrast that with this practice that we see here that Planned Parenthood engages in, and frankly, contrast it with what the previous speaker just said.

The wisdom and the vision the Founders had when they started this place, when they started the greatest country in history, the Founding statement: ``We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.''

I think it's interesting to note the order the Founders placed the rights they chose to mention. Can you pursue happiness? Can you pursue your goals, your dreams, those things that have meaning and significance to you and your family if you first don't have liberty, if you first don't have freedom? And can you ever experience true liberty, true freedom, if government doesn't protect your most fundamental right, your right to life?

That's what this legislation is about. It's about protecting that most sacred, that most precious, that most fundamental right that the Founders understood was central to what we call this thing America. And that's why I'm pleased to support my colleagues in this legislation this evening. I appreciate the work of the gentlelady from Minnesota and, of course, Congressman Smith and the entire Pro-Life Caucus.

Madam Speaker, the Democrat Congress doesn't get it. We have got terrorists who want to do us harm, and we have yet to pass the FISA law. We have troops on the battlefield, and we have yet to pass the supplemental to get them the resources they need to do their job.

We have got a $10 trillion national debt, and yet the budget that was passed 3 weeks ago contains record levels of spending and the largest tax increase in history. Of course, we have got $4 a gallon gasoline and still no up or down vote on energy, expanding energy exploration.

We need to drill, we need to drill now. It's time to stop talking and start doing.