Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, as it stands now, the Democrat health plan equals taxpayer-funded abortions. Let me repeat that. As it stands now, the Democrat health plan equals taxpayer-funded abortions.

If unamended, the Obama health plan restructuring will be the most massive abortion expansion since Roe v. Wade and every insurance premium payer and every taxpayer will be forced to pay for every abortion. The taking of innocent life is not health care. I know; I'm a physician. Yet, without an abortion exclusion, this reform bill will be the platform for thrusting abortion into every aspect of health care in this country.

The Secretary of HHS and the so-called Benefits Advisory Committee will determine the specific mandated services. Abortion will be included in the minimum benefits unless it is excluded, and the Democrats refuse to do that.

This bill does an end run on current abortion funding restrictions by containing language that both authorizes and appropriates.

Mr. Speaker, last week I offered House Resolution 615 which, paraphrased, says, Members of Congress who vote for a government-run health care option agree to opt out of the current congressional exchange of private insurance choices and accept the same government-run program for themselves. The people are tired of this body making laws and crafting programs without having to face the consequences of the votes cast for them. So I challenge Members to cosponsor my resolution and publicly pledge that they will use the same government-run plan they vote for to care for themselves and their families. If it is good enough for American families, it should be good enough for families of Members of Congress. Furthermore, I challenge the American people to hold their Representatives responsible for their actions in this regard by urging their Representatives to support this resolution. The American people deserve health care that is affordable but does not allow the government to interfere with the sacred doctor- patient relationship.

Madam Speaker, I think one of the things that Dr. Broun brings out so eloquently is that it is a true privilege to do what we have done, to practice medicine and try to heal the sick and take care of those folks. That is what we want to do, to be able to continue to provide those services where patients and doctors make those decisions, not the government.

I yield back.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 3082, the ``Military Construction and Veterans Affairs Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2010.''

I have requested funding for the Multi-Purpose Machine Gun Range project in Fiscal Year 2010. The entity to receive the funding for this project is the United States Army, located at Fort Polk/Joint Readiness Training Center, Louisiana. FY10 funds would provide for the construction of a standard design Multi-Purpose Machine Gun Range, required to train and test soldiers on the skills necessary to detect, identify, engage and defeat targets in a tactical environment. Fort Polk does not currently have a suitable training area that meets the requirements needed for machine gunnery. Without this facility, the soldiers of Fort Polk, Reserve, and National Guard units will not be able to maintain efficiency for live fire training for machine gun engagements.

Consistent with the Republican Leadership's policy on earmarks, I hereby certify that to the best of my knowledge, this request: (1) is not directed to an entity or program that will be named after a sitting Member of Congress, (2) is not intended to be used by an entity to secure funds for other entities unless the use of funding is consistent with the specified purpose of the earmark, and (3) meets or exceeds all statutory requirements for matching funds where applicable. I also hereby certify that neither I nor my spouse has any financial interest in this project.

Mr. Speaker, gradually the details of the Democrat health plan are leaking out to the American people. Call it whatever you like, this proposal is nothing more than a government-run health care plan if it has a government-run option. Interestingly, it exempts Members of Congress from having to join a government-run health care system.

As a physician for many years, I am amazed at the number of Congressmen who have enjoined high-quality, personalized health care in this country but are now willing to force post office-style medicine on our people.

In response to this, I have offered a resolution that will give Members of Congress an opportunity to finally be accountable for the decisions we make and how they affect the lives of ordinary Americans. Most Americans feel that Congressmen who vote for legislation creating a government-run health care plan should lead by example and enroll themselves in the same public plan. I agree with them. As a result, I have introduced House Resolution 615 with a number of cosponsors that simply says that if you vote for a government-run health care option, you agree to choose government-run health care for yourself and your family.

I ask Members of both parties to vote for my resolution.

Well, I thank the gentleman, and I will be quick here because I do have something very important. I want to draw the camera's attention to this placard and particularly the Web site outlined below, fleming.house.gov regarding House Resolution 615 that really gets to the meat of the matter. And again this is another effort to appeal to the grass-roots.

Over the past few weeks, Members of Congress and the American people have come to know the details of the proposed health care plan advanced by the

administration and the Democrats. Call it whatever you like, but at the end of the day, the proposal is still a government-run health care system.

Now with its health care plan, the administration and the liberal leadership of this Congress are guaranteeing this democracy is on the solid path towards socialism. As a physician, I am amazed at the number of bureaucrats in this House who are quick to claim a government-run health care plan is the reform this country needs.

So I come before this body to announce a resolution that I just mentioned, House Resolution 615, saying very simply that any Members of Congress who votes for legislation creating a government-run health care plan should lead by example and enroll themselves and their family in the same public plan.

Again, to repeat that, very simply, any Members of Congress who vote for this legislation, that is one that includes a single-payer or government-run health care plan, should be willing to commit to enroll themselves in that. You see, it is very interesting how Congress tends to carve itself out and create sort of a lead state in many things, and this is one good example. The plans that we see thus far, which we don't know the details of, of course, suggest to us that for the next 5 years the Congressmembers will be still on the Federal health plan exchange and not be part of the single-payer system.

In closing, I just want to suggest that to those who are viewing this evening and along the lines of Dr. Broun and Dr. Gingrey, is yes, please call. Call your Representatives. Call your friends. Let everybody know we need to defeat this single-payer system. And the way to do it is to hold our Congressmen accountable for what they do. If it is good for you, it should be good for them as well.

Mr. Speaker, I join the majority of Americans who found themselves in utter disbelief yesterday when they heard the majority leader say that this Congress might need to consider a second stimulus package. After the first stimulus package has proved to be a failure in stabilizing the economy and mitigating unemployment, the best solution the liberal leadership in the House can propose is to continue on this reckless spending spree.

At present, we are spending $100 million a day on interest on the first stimulus, and yet unemployment has now reached 9.5 percent. This first stimulus has proved to be nothing more than a tool to fund a broad-sweeping social agenda that has been on the shelf for years. The Vice President said we misread the economy. Well, Mr. Biden, not one Republican in this House misread it because none of us voted for it.

If we really want to stimulate the economy, we should immediately cut marginal tax rates for all and provide emergency tax relief to the very entities that employ 70 percent of those employed--small businesses.

The American people have had enough of the tax-and-spend mentality of Congress.

Mr. Speaker, as we continue to learn more about the single-payer, government takeover of the health care system proposed by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, I would like to point out why this isn't a good idea.

First, we can't afford it. Cost estimates are now up to $3.5 trillion of money we don't have. Medicare, even with heavy subsidies from private insurance, is on the course of bankruptcy. How will we afford a Medicare-for-all program?

Let me be clear, the government cannot be both competitor and make up the rules of the game. It would be like Microsoft being put in control of the Internet. How would other companies compete with Microsoft?

A single-payer system option will erode the private insurance market that is propping up the public health plan we have today. It is becoming very clear that the public option group has the ultimate goal of destroying competition and choice and substituting it with a government takeover of our health care system.

So what is the end game here? The end game is that once the Federal Government gains full control of our health care system and steps between you and your doctor, we will have exploding budgets which will lead to rationing.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting information regarding the following earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2647, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010. I hereby certify that neither I nor my spouse has any financial interest in these projects.

Congressman John Fleming

H.R. 2647, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, Title I, Acct: APA, Line: 26

Intended Recipient: Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation, Stratford, CT

UH-60A to UH-60L Upgrade for the Army National Guard, $20.4 M, FY10 funds would provide for critical avionics upgrades to modernize Army National Guard Black Hawk medium-lift utility helicopters.

Congressman John Fleming

H.R. 2647, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010, Title XXIII, Acct: MCA, Line: N/A

Intended Recipient: Fort Polk, Leesville, LA

Multipurpose Machine Gun Range, $6.4 M, FY10 funds would provide for the construction of a standard design Multi-Purpose Machine Gun Range, required to train and test soldiers on the skills necessary to detect, identify, engage and defeat targets in a tactical environment. Fort Polk does not currently have a suitable training area that meets the requirements needed for machine gunnery. Without this facility, the soldiers of Fort Polk, Reserve, and National Guard units will not be able to maintain efficiency for live fire training for machine gun engagements.

Madam Speaker, from today, the ABC network will be known as the ``All Barack Channel'' due to unprecedented propaganda for the President's health plan.

Democrats and Republicans agree that our health care system needs reforming, and we essentially agree on how, with one very important exception: a government-run plan is not the solution.

Our current Medicare system is a microcosm of what the proposed public plan would look like. Medicare is propped up by the privately insured as it is, and is still on a course for bankruptcy within 10 years.

Our President says he can make a government-run system lower cost. Then why hasn't anybody been able to do that with Medicare in 50 years? Creating a public option like Medicare will progressively increase private insurance costs due to cost shifting and eventually drive private insurers out of business. Besides the damage it would do to the private sector, the government does not have the money to pay the $1.6 trillion price tag.

As a physician, I say we need to reform, bring down costs, and increase access to private insurance. We do not

need the government in the exam room.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Madam Speaker, word has it that the infamous cap-and- trade, or cap-and-tax, bill will be up for a vote this week.

Cap-and-trade, or what has been more appropriately named cap-and-tax, would create $640 billion in new taxes on American businesses and raise electric bills by $3,100 per household per year on average. The revenue from the new tax will be used to pay for various social programs this administration plans to enact such as the government takeover of our health care.

Simply put, cap-and-tax will cap our growth and trade our jobs. Companies looking to invest in our economy will simply move overseas to escape this enormous tax increase.

If you need a tangible example of why this doesn't work, look at Spain, which has been on this plan for 10 years. The result: utility prices have skyrocketed, and the unemployment rate today is 17\1/2\ percent. This is our view of the future.

Experts tell us that cap-and-tax will do nothing to cap greenhouse gases, but it will put the United States at a global economic disadvantage because China and India have no reason to enact or follow this policy. We will put Americans out of work but create jobs for developing countries.

We need a smart energy policy that will put Americans to work, not further squeeze the pocketbooks of this country's families.

Madam Speaker, like most of America, I support an all- of-the-above solution to this Nation's energy needs. I believe we can have it all

when it comes to energy. We can aggressively pursue renewable energy, nuclear energy and other innovative alternatives while continuing efforts to expand our domestic supply of fossil fuels. We live in a country rich in energy sources, and Congress should encourage production from all available resources and technologies.

Tonight I'd like to focus on a reliable, clean-burning alternative fuel which is in extraordinary abundance right under our feet in this country, and that is natural gas.

Located in my district in northwest Louisiana, recent estimates have projected the Haynesville Shale contains 234 trillion cubic feet of potential natural gas production. This would make it the largest natural gas play in the United States and one of the largest in the world, the equivalent of 18 years' worth of U.S. oil production.

I want to point out to you, the crosshatch area is the so-called Haynesville Shale. As you can see, it overlies several parishes in Louisiana as well as several counties in Texas, a very wide area. Now of course for those listening, shale is nothing more and nothing less than a rock formation deep down in the Earth, somewhere around 2 miles in depth, that acts like a sponge that's full of either gas or oil, and sometimes both. Today we have great methods of extracting fossil fuels from the shale.

But let me turn to some more statistics regarding the Haynesville Shale. It's provided massive injections of capital into the Fourth Congressional District of Louisiana, my district. It's pumped $4.5 billion into the economy in FY 2008. It's created nearly $3.9 billion in household earnings in the same year. The greatest impact on indirect and household earnings was experienced by workers in the mining sector, with new household earnings of $191.3 million in 2008. It's created over $30 million in new earnings in seven separate sectors. Number one, mining, $191.3 million; health care, $56.7 million; management, $46.6 million; professional, scientific and technical services, $38.5 million; retail trade, $35.7 million; manufacturing, $33.5 million; and construction, $31.8 million.

It directly and indirectly created over 32,000 jobs. The new jobs created by the extraction activities in the Haynesville Shale are widely dispersed across industries. Large impacts have been felt in utilities, 5,229 jobs; mining 3,808; health care, 3,496 jobs; and retail trade, 3,433.

Those are a lot of numbers, but I think you understand that the magnitude is what counts here. Conservative estimates report that State and local tax revenues increased by at least $153.3 million in 2008 due to the extraction activities of the Haynesville Shale. Needless to say, Louisiana is not suffering from the effects of the recession, unemployment, or real estate that many other States are today, largely due to the Haynesville Shale. Some parishes are reporting a 300 percent increase in sales tax collections.

I wanted to talk a moment about how we get the natural gas out of that shale that we're talking about that's 2 miles deep in the Earth. The method is called hydraulic fracturing, or ``hydrofracking'' is a more common term. This method has been used for over 60 years and is responsible for 30 percent of America's recoverable oil and gas. Of wells currently operating today, over 90 percent have been fractured at least once.

Environmentalists and their allies in Congress are escalating their assault on affordable and reliable energy with the legislation that would place regulation of hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act, SDWA, a law that was never intended for this purpose. This legislation would have far-reaching negative impacts on energy, energy producers and consumers alike. For years this process has been safely and effectively regulated by individual States; and of the more than 1 million wells fractured, not a single case of drinking water contamination has ever been recorded.

In my State of Louisiana, three different agencies have oversight related to this process. So you see, it's not an unregulated process to begin with. First is the Office of Conservation of the Louisiana Department of Natural Resources, then the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality and, finally, the Department of Health and Hospitals, which tests potable water. Additionally, these agencies already work closely in association with existing Federal regulations under the EPA. As illustrated in these graphics, current industry practices ensure multiple levels of protection between any sources of drinking water and the production zone of an oil and gas well.

Fresh water aquifers are located relatively close to the surface. In the Haynesville shale, for instance, the Wilcox aquifer is found at depths between 200 and 600 feet.

The practice of hydrofracking takes place at a depth of over 10,000 feet or roughly 2 miles.

To put this into perspective, the distance between the aquifer and the hydrofracking equals about 33 footballs fields or 8 Empire State Buildings stacked on top of each other.

To ensure that neither the fluid pumped through the well, nor the oil or gas collected, enters the water supply, steel casings are inserted into the well to depths of between 1,000 and 4,000 feet.

Oil and gas companies are required to set protective surface casing well beyond the water table. For example, in the Haynesville Shale, surface casing must be set at a minimum of 1,800 feet.

The space between this first casing string and drilled hole is filled with cement.

The casing, cement specifications and cementing process are governed by state and federal regulations as well as industry standards. In every case this process is supervised by state agency officials.

Federal regulation of ``hydrofracking'' under the EPA would result in a sharp increase in costs to small and independent producers, as well as a dramatic decrease in output and job creation.

Production in large shale plays such as the Haynesville Shale in Louisiana, the Barnett in Texas and the Marcellus Shale in the Northeast U.S. would essentially grind to a halt and billions of dollars in federal and state tax revenue would be lost.

It is crucial that Congress recognize what resources, such as the Haynesville Shale, will play in this country's long-term economic and national security.

Mr. Speaker, recently elections were held in Iran with the Iranian Government declaring Ahmadinejad the landslide winner over pro-reform challenger Mr. Mousavi.

Mousavi is claiming the results of these elections should be voided because of fraud and other irregularities as people went to vote. He is calling upon his supporters to remain vocal and protest the results of this election, and they are turning out in the tens of thousands, but many have been killed. In response, President Ahmadinejad has tried to minimize anyone with an opposing viewpoint, physically threatening any form of dissent and shutting out the media and communications.

The accusations of voter irregularities must be investigated, a fact supported by Vice President Biden. But until this election is certified, the people of Iran should be supported in their pursuit of peaceful protests, if they so choose. Also, dissidents should be allowed to protest without violence against them.

More importantly, I call upon our President to not be timid, but to speak out firmly on this subject. Either it is a democracy with a legitimate government, or it is a tyrannical dictatorship.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today out of concern with the recent news that one out of every four ballots requested by military personnel and other Americans living overseas may have gone uncounted in the 2008 election. These findings were released in a recent Senate hearing.

The report claims that of 441,000 absentee ballots requested, 98,000 were claimed to be lost. Over 13,000 were rejected because of missing signatures or failure to notarize. Another 11,000 were returned as undeliverable.

I agree with Senator Schumer that this system needs an overhaul. While serving our country overseas, our soldiers deserve to have their votes counted and their voices heard. We need to ensure there is sufficient time for ballots to reach them and have them fill them out and return them for inclusion for their vote to count.

The cornerstone of democracy, Mr. Speaker, is the right to vote. Those sacrificing to protect this right should be given every chance to participate in the electoral process.