Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition because this bill's main intent is government control of health care.

Mr. Speaker, I think it spoke volumes that my friend, John Dingell, chaired the rule. John Dingell has always been a single- payer advocate. That speaks volumes to what the real intent of this bill is.

The goal of this legislation has been clear: to pass a public option that will serve as a gateway to a single-payer,

government-controlled system. Don't trust me; ask my friend, Jan Schakowsky, or ask Chairman Barney Frank. Or believe President Obama who said, ``I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer health care program. But I don't think we're going to be able to eliminate employer coverage immediately.''

Make no mistake, this bill will achieve the single-payer goal. And along with it, it will raise premiums, increase taxes, cuts billions of dollars from Medicare, and cost millions of working Americans their job. And at the end, a single-payer system will force every American into a one-size-fits-all system that rations care. A government that rations care is anti-life.

Mr. Speaker, I'm pleased to be down here on the suspension calendar to talk about the importance of the emergency response of small business centers. But you know what the real emergency response to small business should be is the assault on the workers that's coming because of this health care bill.

Let me talk about the reports today:

10.2 percent unemployment. ``The unemployment rate spiked to its highest level since 1983, much worse than expected as employers continue to trim jobs despite other signs of growth.''

And do you know what the real catastrophe is? We are doing nothing here to help create jobs. In fact, what we're doing, based upon the Democratic bill, H.R. 3962, will destroy jobs. Here are some of the job-destruction aspects of this health care bill:

Tax on jobs will increase unemployment. The Democrat bill would impose $150 billion in taxes on businesses who can't afford to finance their workers' health coverage. Guess what they'll do. They're going to lay off people to be able to afford the taxes to provide the few remaining employees jobs.

The CBO confirmed this tax on jobs would reduce the hiring of low- wage workers and could also lead to wage stagnation as wage compensation is diverted to comply with new Federal taxes and mandates. A model developed by the chief Obama adviser Christina Romer indicates that as many as 5.5 million jobs could be lost. That's not us. That's not the Small Business Committee. That's not the ranking member. That's the administration that's saying 5.5 million jobs could be lost.

Hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes on businesses. In addition to the tax on jobs, H.R. 3962 includes nearly half a trillion dollars in other taxes, including a surtax more than half of whose intended targets are small businesses.

We would be hoping that the Small Business Committee would come down here and say let's don't tax small business with this health care bill. Let's incentivize small businesses to provide health care coverage to their employees.

That's what we'll do on the House version in the amendment offered, once the bill comes to the floor, is we're going to incentivize small businesses to stay in business, keep their employees, and provide health insurance coverage.

In addition to the tax on jobs, the Democrat bill includes a half trillion dollars in other taxes including, as I said before, a surtax. More than half of those intended targets are small businesses.

This is the disaster that we ought to be talking about here. This is a problem that we have with this Congress, the job-destroying plans coming to the floor of the House. Imposing a total of $729.5 billion in higher taxes on a struggling economy will be a recipe for years, if not decades, of prolonged stagnation.

I thank the ranking member for yielding me the time.

Mr. Speaker, I again come down on the floor. It is a good time to talk about jobs and the economy and the importance of what the

Small Business Committee here does. I applaud my colleague from Illinois for addressing the Small Business Development Centers because, guess what, they are going to be needed. They are going to be needed to help train and find jobs when we have this massive loss of jobs that will occur because of the Democrat health care bill.

Don't take my word for it, take the word of Christina Romer, who is the adviser to the President. She says that the Democrat bill would impose $150 billion in taxes on businesses who cannot afford to finance their workers' health coverage. So what will happen, these employees will be laid off. People will lose their jobs to try to make the payment on the new tax that is going to be burdened by this bill.

CBO confirmed this tax on jobs could reduce, and CBO is the Congressional Budget Office, nonpartisan, they confirmed this tax on jobs could reduce the hiring of low-wage workers and could also lead to wage stagnation as wage compensation is diverted to comply with new Federal taxes and mandates. Roemer indicates that as many as 5.5 million jobs could be lost. So we are really going to need these SBDCs, and we will need them to be current to help find positions for these displaced workers.

This Democrat Affordable Health Care for America Act will destroy jobs, hundreds of billions in taxes on businesses. In addition to the tax on jobs, the Democrat health care bill includes nearly half a trillion dollars in other taxes, including a surtax, more than half of those whose intended targets are small businesses.

So as the Small Business Committee is bringing bills to the floor, they ought to be worried about what is reported today, 10.2 percent unemployment. But, no, we are not talking about how to create jobs on the floor of this House. We are talking about how to destroy jobs by new regulations, new taxation, hundreds of billions of dollars in taxes on businesses. H.R. 3962, the Democrat health bill, includes nearly half a trillion dollars in other taxes, including a surtax, more than half whose intended targets are small businesses. Imposing a total of $729.5 billion in higher taxes on a struggling economy would be a recipe for years, if not decades, of prolonged stagnation.

So I appreciate the time from my colleague. We are going to need these Small Business Development Centers because of the massive tax regulatory regime being passed by Democrats on the floor of this House which will continue to destroy jobs, not create jobs.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Harrisburg Masonic Lodge #325 A.F. & A.M. in Harrisburg, Illinois upon the dedication of their new facility on November 7, 2009. Additionally, I wish to congratulate them on their 150th anniversary.

The Harrisburg Lodge #325 was granted a charter by the State of Illinois Grand Lodge on October 5, 1859. The charter members were: Green Berry Raum, Worshipful Master; Moses P. McGehee, Senior Warden; Richard N. Warfield, Junior Warden; Benjamin Bruce, Treasurer; John W. Mitchell, Secretary; John S. Eubanks, Senior Deacon; Harvey R. Pearce, Junior Deacon; William G. Sloan, Senior Steward; Charles Nyberg, Junior Steward and Charles A. Towle, Tiler.

Born in Golconda, Illinois, Green Berry Raum led a life of continued service, was a member of the 40th Congress. Mr. Raum practiced law in Harrisburg, Illinois; served in the Union Army during the Civil War as a major in the Fifty-sixth Regiment, Illinois Volunteer Infantry and served in the 40th Congress.

Richard C. Davenport of Harrisburg Lodge #325 A.F. & A.M. became the Grand Master Mason of Illinois, overseeing all Masons in the state. His tenure in that position lasted from 1925 to 1926 and then served as Grand Secretary from 1928-1960. During his term, The Grand Lodge Secretary's office was in the Harrisburg Masonic Lodge, located on North Main and Walnut Streets.

The 2009 officers include Terry Mott, Worshipful Master; Don Leibenguth, Secretary; Richard D. Harper, Treasurer; Bruce Tolley, Senior Warden; Mark Mathis, Junior Warden; Mack Farmer, Senior Deacon; Raymond Gunning, Junior Deacon; Dave Businaro, Marshall; George Knight, Senior Steward; Kerry Jones, Junior Steward; Cameron Brown, Tiler and Lyndel Alexander, Chaplin.

I am pleased to recognize the Harrisburg Masonic Lodge #325 A.F. & A.M. on this special occasion. I extend my best wishes for an enjoyable rededication and grand opening.

First of all to my friend, the chairman, when you start involving medical hospitals, you could change medical protocols and that segues into health care debate and other issues.

But I want to start by saying, you cannot tell me that this debate is about safety. You just cannot. Much of this bill is a means to an end to use Homeland Security regulations to force new processes and procedures, in refineries, chemical plants, or water facilities that are going to be more costly.

Now why would we do that? In a time when we have job loss after job loss, why would we add more costs to this struggling economy? Because there's an agenda here, and the agenda is an environmental agenda that's been running this country since the Democrats took over.

I want to point out the hypocrisy of this safety and security debate. I have been reading through the health care bill, and we got it Friday. I have family obligations and other things, so I am not through with it yet, but I almost am through.

The last 300 pages deal with the Indian Health Service, which has never come through the committee process. Why has it not? Because it could not pass on its own.

On page 1,785, I want to read something. So don't tell me safe drinking

water is not a safety and security concern because in your health care bill, this is what you have in there:

``Certain capabilities are not a prerequisite. The financial and technical capability of an Indian Tribe, Tribal Organization, or Indian community to safely operate, manage, and maintain a sanitation facility shall not be a prerequisite to the provision or construction of sanitation facilities by the Secretary.''

In other words, in our health care bill we're going to give money to build new water purification plants and they don't have to be trained. They don't have to meet any scientific categories.

Here you are putting a burden on private water systems, on community water systems, municipal water plants, and you are going to exempt tribes from even knowing how to operate the water plant.

This is your bill. Page 1,785. Read your bill. Unbelievable. I only read this last night; 1,990 pages. On page 1,785, ``The financial and technical capability of an Indian Tribe, Tribal Organization, or Indian community to safely operate''--shall not be a prerequisite; shall not.

Although we are going to do some weird IST provisions, inherently safer technology, put a new burden on water technology systems, put new burdens on water community systems, put new burdens on rural systems, you're exempting tribes from even knowing how to operate the water plant.

Mr. Chairman, it is all about jobs today. This bill affects jobs and the economy. We are close to 9.8 percent unemployment in the manufacturing sector, and here we are going to put more, additional burdens on those who create jobs. If you don't have employers, you don't have employees.

I appreciate my agriculture members coming down here because it is not about the end users, it is about the producers of the chemicals. It is about the producers of the anhydrous. Those are the folks whose costs are going to go up.

Now I like to come down here and talk about the hypocrisy of this whole debate, especially on the Safe Drinking Water Act, because if it really was about security, and I talked about this in the Rules Committee, and no one has answered this question, on the health care bill, Mr. Chairman, your bill, page 1785, we say this: ``The financial and technical capability of an Indian Tribe, or Tribal Organization, or Indian community to safely operate, manage, and maintain a sanitation facility shall not be a prerequisite to the provision or construction of sanitation facilities by the Secretary.''

Your health care bill says if the Indian Tribe cannot safely run a plant, we are going to build you one anyway. We are not worried about safety and security.

Page 1785, a financial and technical capability of an Indian Tribe, shall be exempt even if they can't operate safely a water treatment plant. So what you are doing in the health care bill, exempting Indian tribes who don't know how to manage a refinery, you are giving them protections in this health care bill. But in this bill, municipal water plants pay more; private water plants pay more; refineries pay more. Indian tribes under your health care bill----

I would just say why would we exempt Indian tribes from the ability to prove that they can actually operate a water purification plant? Why would we do that? If safety and security is important, the whole premise of this bill, why would we exempt Indian tribes? Page 1785 of your bill in the health care reform. Three hundred pages on Indian health, not one page through the committee process. It is an abomination of the process.

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from New York for giving me this time and allowing me to go promptly.

Everybody loves John McHugh, an honorable man. We have a great history in this country that a lot of people take for granted which is civilian control of the military. That is honorably being served by Secretary Gates as Secretary of Defense, and we are honored to have our colleague and friend, John McHugh, accept and hold the position of Secretary of the Army.

John is no stranger to being involved in military affairs, especially the Army, serving as I know people will talk about in Upstate New York and the Fort Drum area, the 10th Mountain Division, where some of our best military fighters are stationed, in a tough environment, and have been deployed, like many U.S. Army forces around the world, in difficult environments.

John has always been concerned not just about their training and morale and welfare, but the post issues, housing issues, morale and welfare. You name it, John McHugh was a leader in that area.

So it was a great pleasure, and many of us were thankful that President Obama looked down to the ranks of the Republican minority to find a highly qualified individual who would ascend to the position of the senior civilian leader of our Army.

John also served many years on the West Point Board of Visitors, a position now that I get to take and assume his spot on that board, but I know a position that he loved, at West Point where we are training our young men and women of the future to be future leaders of the Army. He took that job very, very seriously.

I thank my colleague and friend from New York, Peter King, for allowing me this time to come down and congratulate John, to put some words into the Record, to say we miss him here, and that we know he will serve our country well in the position that he is so well trained and prepared for.

And with that, I thank my colleague.

Mr. Speaker, given 1 minute, what should I talk about?

Should I mention how Federal tax dollars will be used to fund abortion? Should I highlight the fact that tax dollars will go to fund illegal immigration since there is no verification? Should I talk about the thousands of seniors in my district who will lose their Medicare Advantage accounts?

I should, but I will primarily mention what the real plan is here, and that is to use a public option to enact a one-payer system. If you don't believe me, ask Chairman Frank; Congresswoman Schakowsky; the head of the Democratic National Committee, Howard Dean; and last but not least, President Obama. They've always had that as their stated objective.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the achievements of a talented group of student-athletes from Effingham, Illinois.

The Effingham St. Anthony boys golf team took state championship honors this month at the Illinois High School Association's finals at Prairie Vista Golf Course in Bloomington. The squad entered the final day tied with a competitive Mt. Carmel team, but St. Anthony's jumped out to an early lead in the final round and held on to clinch the title.

I want to congratulate Coach Phil Zaccari for his work with the team. But most of all, I want to congratulate the 2009 state champion boys golf squad from Effingham St. Anthony: Michael McHugh, Michael Koester, Derek Rohlfing, Kit Koerner, Lewis Martin and James Jansen. They have represented themselves, their school and their community in an exemplary fashion and I want to join with all the members of this House in wishing them continued success in their athletic and academic endeavors.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the achievements of a talented group of student-athletes from Massac County, Illinois.

The Massac County High School girls golf team took state championship honors this month at the Illinois High School Association's finals at the Crab Orchard Golf Club in Carterville. The Lady Patriots put on an impressive showing at the state finals, finishing 39 strokes ahead of the runner-up. Tala Mumford, of Massac County, shot a 163 for the tournament and was honored as top individual performer.

I want to congratulate Coach Kim Hille for her work with the team. But most of all, I want to congratulate the 2009 state champion girls golf squad from Massac County: Tala Mumford, Sammi Weber, Taylor King, Kristen Faulkner, Laura Bremer and Peyton Helm. They have represented themselves, their school and their community in an exemplary fashion and I want to join with all the members of this House in wishing them continued success in their athletic and academic endeavors.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life of Art Furuya, a decorated soldier, devoted husband and loving father.

Mr. Furuya was interned at the onset of World War II because of his Japanese heritage. At the age of 17, Furuya enlisted in the U.S. Army and served as a member of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, a unit comprised entirely of Japanese-Americans and the most highly decorated unit in World War II. During the war, he became a lifelong friend with a fellow member of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team, Senator Daniel Inouye. Mr. Furuya received two purple hearts for wounds he suffered on the battlefields of Italy and France.

After World War II, Mr. Furuya married his wife, Penny. They lived in Nashville for over 50 years, where they raised their family and were members of St. Paul United Church of Christ.

I extend my heartfelt condolences to Mr. Furuya's daughter, Anne; his sons, Don and Jim; and his two grandchildren. He was an example of how Americans can rise up to serve their country, even in the face of such great adversity.

Madam Speaker, I submit the following column, written by David Nicklaus of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch.

Net neutrality isn't a neutral term, and it isn't good for the Net

David Nicklaus, St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Some beats, like banking, need tougher cops, but others,

like the Internet, are doing fine with no cop at all.

So when the chairman of the Federal Communications

Commission weighs in on an important Internet issue by vowing

to become ``a smart cop on the beat,'' we should worry that

the Web's best years, characterized by rapid growth with

little regulation, may be behind it.

Of course, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski doesn't

characterize his stance that way. His idea of a ``smart cop''

is one who enforces the principle that all Internet traffic

should be treated equally. And he argues that his brand of

policing will encourage innovation, not stifle it.

The principle Genachowski endorsed this week--and one he

intends to codify into FCC regulations--is referred to as net

neutrality. Despite the lofty-sounding name, however, a net

neutrality rule wouldn't be neutral. It would amount to

favoring one group of Internet companies, the content

creators, in an ongoing turf battle with broadband providers.

Broadband firms, like AT&T, Verizon and the cable TV

industry, own the Internet's infrastructure. Companies like

Google and eBay own the content that travels over those

broadband networks.

These two groups obviously need each other, but that

doesn't mean they have to like each other.

A net neutrality rule would require broadband providers to

treat all content alike in terms of pricing and access.

Without it, content companies worry they might face an extra

fee for speedy delivery of bandwidth-gobbling applications,

like video downloading sites or Internet telephone services.

Say Microsoft, for example, paid the fee, but Google

didn't. Microsoft's site would get an unfair advantage, the

net neutrality advocates argue, allowing the Verizons of the

world to pick winners and losers--and perhaps to snuff out

competitors of their own video and phone businesses.

The broadband companies counter that they have invested

huge sums in Internet infrastructure, including $70 billion

last year alone. They generally don't use discriminatory

pricing now, but some people in the industry think it would

be one way to pay for a next-generation network that could

carry far more data at faster speeds.

If those investments aren't made, the information

superhighway will eventually look like I-70 at rush hour,

with video file-sharers slowing things down for the folks who

just want to read e-mail or check an airline schedule.

Scott Cleland, a consultant who runs the broadband-

industry-backed site NetCompetition.org, says a strict net

neutrality regime would discourage infrastructure investment

and make the Internet less secure. If the network owners

can't discriminate among forms of content, he argues, they

would lose their ability to root out viruses and other

malware.

Cleland may be overstating the security argument. Any

reasonable FCC regulation would surely allow the broadband

companies to police their networks for harmful files. His

larger point, though, is a good one: Why risk messing up

something that isn't broken?

Existing antitrust law should prevent, say, AT&T from

discriminating against an Internet-phone competitor like

Skype. Beyond such an obvious abuse, it's hard to see what

harm can come from letting the broadband firms price their

network however they want.

It's often said that on the Internet, information wants to

be free. That four-letter word has two meanings--free as in

zero cost, and free as in unregulated and unrestricted--and

they are at odds in this debate.

If we impose regulations just to keep down the cost of

certain services, we may find that we've lost the very

freedom that makes the Internet so successful and so

valuable.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a true friend of the outdoors whose life was tragically cut short this summer.

Thomas Pigg, of Carlyle, Illinois, was an employee of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers at Carlyle Lake for four years, and then at the Kaskaskia River Project for another three. He was an instructor at the Illinois Federation of Outdoor Recreation's Youth Skills Camp and was dedicated to exploring and preserving the natural treasurers of his native Clinton County, especially the Carlyle Lake recreation area. Tom believed that our natural resources should be enjoyed by all and he worked tirelessly to see that the young people of our community had the opportunity to visit and benefit from having such a magnificent site as Carlyle Lake in their back yard.

Tragically, Tom's life was cut short by an automobile accident in July. I extend my heartfelt condolences to his father and step-mother, Daniel and Bonnie; his mother and step-father, Candyce and Russel; his brothers, Andy and Wes; his sister, Katie; his step-brother, Corey; and the many members of his family and community who mourn his loss.

Tom's memory will live on at his beloved Carlyle Lake, however. This month, the Corps of Engineers will honor Tom's service and his devotion by dedicating a section of the lake as the Thomas M. Pigg Wetland Restoration Area. It is a fitting honor for a man who was taken from us too soon and it is a site to honor Tom's wish for future generations to enjoy our nation's wonderful natural resources.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the St. Lawrence Parish in Lawrenceville, Illinois. On October 18, 2009, a centennial liturgy was celebrated with Bishop Edward K. Braxton acting as the celebrant and homilist. A dinner was held after the service to honor the event.

On July 20, 1909, local Catholics met at Lawrenceville City Hall hoping to form their own parish. After land was purchased, 22 families celebrated the first mass in the unfinished church. Ruth August Diver was the first parishioner to be baptized in the new church on March 5, 1911. The finished church was dedicated in October of 1911. The parish has continued to expand, including the opening of a school in 1956.

I would like to congratulate the members of St. Lawrence Parish for reaching this milestone and wish them a blessed and joyous celebration as they mark 100 years of service to God and their community. I want to encourage the parish with the words of Matthew 5:16; ``Just so, your light must shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your heavenly Father.''