Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I am here to share a short letter I received from one of my constituents who used to own a small business. His name is Steve, and his letter eloquently addresses the issue we are discussing today.

Steve wrote: ``I know it is a very contentious time in Washington. The 2008 election led me to sell my business because I saw an assault on the small business owner. My peers continue to ask me how I anticipated our current situation.

``First, it was the mandated health insurance, then more government regulation and regulators, and now it is the assault on my earnings that I worked hard for over the last 40 years.

``The President and his Progressive friends will not be satisfied until they kill what reward for risk incentive is left.

``Equal wealth for everyone is not guaranteed in our Constitution.

``The reward for risk is what made this country what it is today.

``I ask that you hold the line even if it means losing the next election.''

I came to Congress to get Nevada's economy back on track, and the only way to do that is by listening to our job creators--by listening to their concerns and then addressing those very concerns. When I talk with Nevada's small business owners, they feel the same way Steve does. They say the reason they're not creating jobs is due to too many harmful regulations, too many taxes and too much government spending.

We are in a fiscal crisis, and it is killing our job creators' very ability to create jobs. In all of my conversations with Nevada business owners, the one thing--the one thing--I've never heard them say is, ``Do you know what would help me create more jobs? A tax increase.''

I urge Nevadans and my colleagues not to listen to the President's false choice--the idea that we can fix government's fiscal problems by merely closing loopholes and reining in subsidies. Now, let me be clear. I support closing loopholes and subsidies because we need to level the playing field, but that won't by itself solve the problem, because even if we close the loopholes and rein in the subsidies, the government will still have a spending problem, and it will only be a matter of time before another tax increase is proposed.

Past all of the talking points and hyperbole, the President's real choice is about the tax burden families and businesses face in Nevada and across the country. Will that burden be lower or higher? I am fighting to make sure it's lower. Our job creators, like Steve, realize this. Why doesn't Congress? Forty-nine of 50 States balance their budgets. Why doesn't Congress? Nevada families live within their means. Why doesn't Congress?

Just because there are checks in the checkbook doesn't mean there is money in the checking account. The Cut, Cap, and Balance proposal is a thoughtful solution to solving the government's spending problem that protects the promise of Social Security and Medicare for seniors and veterans' benefits to our brave men and women who have fought to protect our freedoms. It will cut $5.8 trillion over the next decade and give our job creators confidence that we are serious about getting this economy back on track.

I urge my colleagues to support the Cut, Cap, and Balance bill and show that we are serious about balancing Washington's checkbook.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, Thomas Jefferson said: ``Laws and institutions must go hand-in-hand with the progress of the human mind.''

As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times.

Almost 30 years have elapsed since this Congress passed the Nuclear Waste Policy Act; and over that time, technology and scientific knowledge have evolved and, indeed, new discoveries made, truths discovered, and opinions changed.

But for some reason, Congress still clings to technology from a bygone era to address today's nuclear waste issues.

The fact is, sticking our country's nuclear waste in a hole in the ground for long-term storage is a 20th-century solution. Instead, we should encourage the use of a 21st-century technology.

My amendment redirects money from the nuclear waste fund and designated from Yucca Mountain licensing and waste storage into the development of a 21st-century solution, a fuel recycling and accelerated transmutation program. This program would significantly reduce the toxicity of nuclear waste and retrieve additional energy from the material through radio chemistry and subcritical transmutation using accelerator technology.

Perhaps more important for Nevada, the site of Yucca Mountain and the State with the highest unemployment rate in the country, is the fact that this 21st-century solution has the potential to create in a single generation no less than 10,000 new direct research and development jobs utilizing existing regional technology capabilities.

My amendment also provides continued oversight funding for the State of Nevada and the affected units of local government as they have received resources to oversee the Yucca program since its inception. Even during the most recent continuing resolution passed by this body only a few short months ago, funding through the Department of Energy continued to provide these resources.

The U.S. continues falling behind developed and developing countries in fully funding and implementing these types of projects, 21st-century solutions that are critical to maintaining our Nation's economic and technological superiority.

I urge my colleagues to embrace the future of nuclear waste disposal and support this amendment so that this institution may go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind and with the change of circumstances this institution also advances to keep pace with the times.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I would respectfully request that during your deliberation on the point of order that you consider the fact that in the second session of the 111th Congress, a similar provision was passed by this body in H.R. 5866.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 292.

On March 19, 2011, in response to United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, the Obama administration, in cooperation with our NATO allies, commenced Operation Odyssey Dawn to enforce a no-fly zone in Libyan airspace.

In accordance with the War Powers Resolution, the administration must seek congressional authorization for this operation within 60 days.

Madam Speaker, that 60 days has come and gone, and we are now on our 77th day of conducting military operations in Libya. Yet the President has still not sought congressional authorization.

Without congressional authorization, the War Powers Resolution dictates that the President must withdraw our forces within 90 days.

As that 90th day rapidly approaches, this legislation puts the administration on notice that it has 14 days to provide a compelling rationale for our involvement in Libya, or Congress will exercise its constitutional prerogative to withhold funds for this operation.

Since the commencement of operations, the administration has often cited the need to protect civilians in Libya as the basis for our involvement in this operation.

While I understand the moral imperative to assist and protect these civilians as they engage in open conflict with a tyrannical and oppressive government, it cannot be the policy of the United States to commit U.S. troops to every civil conflict throughout the world.

In fact, this is not U.S. policy. The Arab Spring has ushered in an era of civil unrest throughout the Middle East. Civilians in Syria, Yemen, Egypt, Bahrain, Iran, and Tunisia have all risen up in protest against their governments.

The outcome of each of these uprisings has varied significantly, as have the national security implications for the United States. Yet the United States did not come to the aid of these civilians.

So why then is Libya different? Why is it in the national security interests of the United States to involve ourselves in this civil conflict and not the others?

As Members of Congress we have a responsibility to the American people to ask these questions and the President has the obligation to answer them.

If the President is unable or unwilling to communicate a justification that clearly defines U.S. national security interests for committing U.S. troops and resources to Libya, then we have an obligation to compel him to withdraw.

H. Res. 292 does this and it does it in a responsible manner.

The alternative, Madam Speaker, is to support the bill offered by the gentleman from Ohio, Mr. Kucinich, and force the President to withdraw our forces in 15 days.

While I commend the gentleman from Ohio for offering this legislation and appreciate his efforts to hold the administration accountable for committing U.S. Forces without congressional authorization, I have a number of concerns with the 15 day timeline.

First, it is logistically impossible to completely and responsibly disengage our forces within this short timeframe. We should not shackle our military leaders with an unrealistic mandate to withdraw because their Commander-in-Chief did not comply with his obligations under War Powers Resolution.

They must be given adequate time to plan, organize and execute this withdrawal. Fifteen days simply does not permit this.

Additionally, while I agree that Congress' ultimate responsibility is to the American people, withdrawing our forces in fifteen days would completely undermine our number one obligation to provide for the common defense of the United States.

The safety and security of our nation depends greatly on the cooperation and commitments of our allies.

The NATO alliance is the centerpiece of our efforts to support and promote safety and stability throughout the world.

Withdrawing our forces from Libya in 15 days pulls the rug out from under our NATO allies and would have dire consequences for our future cooperation and the security of the United States.

Like our military leaders, our NATO allies must be provided ample time to reassess and reorganize their military strategy to carry out operations without our support. Again, 15 days does not permit this.

For these reasons I cannot support Mr. Kucinch's legislation. While I agree that we must hold the administration accountable, we must not do so at the expense of our allies.

Madam Speaker, H. Res. 292 is the responsible alternative. It asserts congressional authority by compelling the administration to adhere to its obligations under the War Powers Resolution, while at the same time ensuring that we do not undermine our allies.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support H. Res. 292, and to vote down H. Con. Res. 51.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

I am offering this amendment to restore funding to the top 25 cities under the Urban Area Security Initiative.

This issue is personal to me. I spent a great deal of my career in the anti-terrorism field. I have developed threat assessments and plans for terrorism countermeasures and prevention on the local, State and Federal levels.

I oversaw medical response operations to the embassy bombings in East Africa in 1998 and the bombing of the USS Cole in 2000, and I was a first responder to the World Trade Centers. I felt the heat from the rubble pile as it melted firefighters' boots. I breathed the dust and chaos into my lungs as we worked around the clock.

I have seen terrorism firsthand; and I will, we must, do everything possible to prevent another attack on this U.S. homeland.

One of the failures identified after the 9/11 attacks was the lack of coordination between local first responders and Federal counterterrorism specialists. The UASI grant fills this vacuum. If this amendment doesn't pass, key areas' terrorism readiness funding will go away.

I understand the need to prioritize dollars and scarce resources, but limiting funding to a cap of 10 cities threatens our overall national preparedness. This amendment does not

increase costs, but expands the total number of cities under consideration to at least 25.

Let me tell you about my district, my area, Las Vegas and Clark County. According to the Department of Homeland Security, we have 221 elements of critical infrastructure and key resources. These include the Hoover Dam, which supplies power to over 500 million homes and the new dam bypass bridge, which is the second highest bridge in the United States. We have Nellis Air Force Base and the world famous Las Vegas Strip. The Las Vegas area is also home to 17 of the world's 20 largest hotels, with almost 149,000 rooms.

At the corner of Las Vegas Boulevard and Tropicana Boulevard, there are more hotel rooms than in the entire City of San Francisco. And we have seen that the hospitality and tourism industry has become the soft target of choice since 9/11 with nine attacks against international hotel resorts over the last 9 years, including the coordinated attacks in Mumbai in 2008.

Two weeks ago, I toured the Southern Nevada Counterterrorism Fusion Center, our State's primary fusion center. These centers facilitate greater cooperation between local first responders and Federal counterterrorism specialists and are supported by UASI funding.

Now is not the time to recreate the vacuum that existed prior to the UASI program. Now is the time to stand behind those who stand on the front lines providing the blanket of protection under which we rest at night. It is for these reasons that I offer this reasonable and measured amendment that increases the number of eligible cities to 25.

I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to begin by recognizing our military's extraordinary efforts to successfully close a painful chapter in American history. Of course, the military could not have performed their mission so successfully without our intelligence community's unflagging efforts. The men and women of the intelligence community are the unsung heroes of not only the mission to bring Osama bin Laden to justice but many other successful counterterrorism operations, and they deserve tremendous credit.

The successful bin Laden mission highlights the critical role our intelligence community plays in protecting our national security. Two of the intelligence community's chief weapons against terrorism are information and the ability to communicate that information swiftly. I'm proud to say that the airmen at Creech Air Force Base in my home State of Nevada are critical to both capturing and communicating information that is necessary for intelligence operations.

One reason Nevadans elected me last fall was to restore government accountability and oversight. Secretary of Defense Gates and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Admiral Mullen both identified America's growing debt as our number one national security concern.

As we're fighting the war on terror, we must not allocate resources without due process.

And we must ensure the intelligence community is accountable for their operations because most of their operations occur outside of the public's view.

Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Ruppersberger are doing incredible work to make these ideas that we share a reality. I applaud their dedication to restoring proper accountability and oversight to the intelligence community. I am confident the Intelligence Authorization Act provides the resources and latitude our intelligence community needs while ensuring fiscal and operational responsibility.

That is why I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 754.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that I may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of H.R. 856, a bill originally introduced by Representative Heller of Nevada, for the purposes of adding cosponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule XII.

Mr. Speaker, I have said, like most in this Chamber, that I oppose a government shutdown. Last November, Nevadans spoke. The American people spoke. They said cut the spending so the economy can grow.

My primary goal is not a government shutdown. It is to do the job that the people elected me to do: cut the spending and grow the economy.

Quite simply, our country is broke, all because there are checks in the checkbook doesn't mean there's money in the checking account. And we're paying the overdraft fees with money that we're borrowing from China.

Some people ask: What's the difference between a billion here and a billion there? Well, that's just $1 billion that we don't have. There is an old saying: Take care of your pennies, and your dollars will take care of themselves. For those who question the importance of a billion dollars, I would say, take care of your billions, and your trillions will take care of themselves.

I thank the gentleman from Alabama for the time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to oppose H.R. 830, the FHA Refinance Program Termination Act. I represent the district that is truly ground zero for America's housing crisis; 390,192 mortgages in Nevada are underwater. Let me say that again: 390,192 families in Nevada are underwater.

I agree that people need a paycheck, not a government check, but we must help individuals who are trying to do the right thing. This program gives some of those Nevadans who are current on their mortgage but underwater the ability to refinance their loan.

Some will say this program is a failure because too few mortgages have been refinanced through it. They'll say not enough money has been distributed. I say, a failed PR job should not be the reason a good program dies. And the FHA Refinance Program can be a good program, but it needs more attention, and perhaps reform, so homeowners know it's an option.

Vote ``no'' on H.R. 830 and give homeowners a chance to take advantage of this program.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, today I also rise in support of H.R. 4, the Small Business Paperwork Mandate Elimination Act of 2011. There is no doubt this job-killing 1099 hidden tax deserves repeal.

Nevada's unemployment rate is a Nation-high 14.5 percent. We need to create jobs. Eighty percent of Nevada's employees work for small businesses. So I asked small business owners what the government should do to create jobs.

Paul Beehler, a small business owner, operates Midas shops throughout southern Nevada, buys multiple auto parts from multiple venders, said regulations and hidden taxes, like the 1099 hidden tax, keep him from hiring new workers.

You know what? More than 170 small business organizations Nationwide agree with Paul and have called for the 1099 hidden tax's repeal.

No, Mr. Speaker, I shall not yield.

Washington said it wants to hear job-creating ideas from the business community. Here is one that they are screaming about.

Nevada's families are hurting. American families are hurting. It's time to end the job-killing 1099 hidden tax and get Nevadans back to work.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute and honor the life of Sergeant Major James Franklin Bowling, Jr., United States Marine Corps (Retired). Sergeant Major Bowling was born the son of a marine on July 21, 1952, in Quantico, Virginia. He served his nation as a marine for over 30 years, retiring in 2001, but remaining active in his local community.

Sergeant Major James Franklin Bowling joined the United States Marines Corps in 1970 where he served for 31 years. He completed tours in Okinawa, Saudi Arabia, Desert Storm and Desert Shield. Jim's true passion in the Marine Corps was serving as a Drill Instructor. He served as a Drill Instructor for two tours at Quantico for Officers Candidacy School and three tours at Parris Island. At Parris Island he met a then-Sergeant in the Marine Corps who would become his wife; Gunnery Sergeant Jacqueline Bowling (nee Milon), USMC (Retired).

Sergeant Major Bowling was truly a dedicated marine. His drive to serve leaves a positive impression on his family, his community, and his country. His exceptional tour of service saw the end of the Vietnam War, the end of the Cold War and the beginning of the Global War on Terror.

After retiring from the Marine Corps almost 10 years ago, the Bowlings moved to Henderson, Nevada. Sergeant Major Bowling became active with veterans in Henderson. He joined the Black Mountain Detachment of the Marine Corps League and served as its Detachment Commandant from 2007 to 2009. He served as an officer with the Devil Dogs, an honorary degree within the Marine Corps League. The Sergeant Major also dedicated part of his life to the Devil Pups Youth Leadership Program of America, serving as a sponsor and Volunteer PT Instructor with them. At the Department of Nevada level of the Marine Corps League, he served as Junior Vice Commandant from 2008 to 2009, and was serving as Detachment Junior Past Commandant and Detachment Chaplain when he passed away.

Sergeant Major Bowling's career is also distinguished by the many decorations and awards he received during his service: Meritorious Service Medal (2nd Award); Navy and Marine Corps Commendation Medal; Navy and Marine Corps Achievement Medal; Navy Unit Commendation; Meritorious Unit Commendation; Good Conduct Medal (9th Award); National Defense Service Medal (2nd Award); Southwest Asia Service Medal (2nd Award); Sea Service Deployment Ribbon; Overseas Service Ribbon; Drill Instructor Ribbon (4th Award); Kuwait Liberation Medal (Saudi Arabia); Kuwait Liberation Medal (Kuwait); Rifle Expert Badge (3rd Award); and the Pistol Sharpshooter Badge.

Sergeant Major Bowling is survived by his wife of 22 years, Gunnery Sergeant Jacqueline Bowling (nee Milon), USMC (Retired). He also leaves behind his son, Jonathan; his mother, Hattie Trombley; two sisters, Becky Bird and Lode Silcox; and two brothers, David Bowling and Stephen Bowling.

Sergeant Major Bowling will be remembered for his sacrifice and willing service, and for the extraordinary qualities he displayed as a husband, father, and friend. His personal warmth, sense of humor, and unfailing optimism brightened the lives of everyone around him. We will long remember the great impact he made on us all--he will be truly missed.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize a heroic Nevadan who passed away February 2, 2011. His name was Francisco ``Frank'' Cedula. He was born in the Philippines in Pasay City on January 7, 1923. Frank studied journalism at the University of Santo Tomas until he joined the Philippine resistance in 1941. At just 17 years old, he fought to disrupt the Japanese military's occupation. Eventually, Frank was captured and tortured by the Japanese, but he managed to escape and rejoin the guerilla fighters.

On December 26, 1941, Frank fought in the Battle of Piis. More than 100 American and Filipino soldiers fought and died in the battle. Their sacrifice gave General MacArthur's troops, his small USAFFE forces, enough time to assemble in Bataan. Commander Cedula was the lone survivor of the 3-day battle. He was bayonetted four times and left for dead. The natives assigned to bury the dead found him alive and nursed him back to health. Once healthy, he again rejoined the guerilla forces and continued the fight. Later in the war, Frank helped liberate American prisoners of war.

When the war ended, Frank served as the Filipino Veterans Legion National Commander for almost three decades. During his term as National Commander, the Filipino Veterans Legion created significant new benefits for their members. In 2005, Commander Cedula authored ``Filipino Veterans of WWII--An Endangered Human Specie'' to help inform congressional Members and veteran supporters about World War II Filipino veterans who were promised, and later denied, recognition and benefits for 60 years.

Frank was a man who set goals, then accomplished them. Frank achieved one goal when the World War II Filipino Veterans Equity Bill became law. After the law passed, Frank coauthored a new book, ``Denial and Restitution by America.'' This sequel to his first book thanked the congressional and Senate leaders who fought to turn the World War II Filipino Veterans Equity Bill into law.

For 20 years, he planned to construct a memorial marker at kilometer 134 in Quezon, Philippines, to honor and memorialize the men who lost their lives in the battle. Commander Cedula returned from a trip to the Philippines where he finalized the funding for that dream.

I am honored to call Commander Cedula a friend and a Nevadan.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support House Resolution 72.

House Resolution 72 directs House Committees to review excessive and costly Federal Government regulations. These excessive and costly Federal Government regulations stifle job creation and contribute to the uncertainty preventing small-businesses from hiring new employees.

Recently, the Washington Post reported ``nonfinancial companies are sitting on $1.8 trillion in cash.'' I wondered why that is. After speaking with many Nevada small-business owners the answer is clear: economic uncertainty. The uncertainty created by these government regulations is a key reason Nevada suffers from the highest unemployment in the Nation at over 14 percent.

We are only beginning to scratch Obamacare's overly burdensome, regulatory-riddled surface, and what we've found is alarming. Just this week I asked Gail Johnson, who employs young teachers, if there are regulations in Obamacare she feels are overly burdensome and interfering with her ability to do business. One example she pointed to is a regulation that now requires employers who provide health insurance plans to offer policies that have no dollar limits on durable medical equipment--like a walker.

Unsurprisingly, there is a cost to having that kind of coverage added. Yet, Ms. Johnson's employees are young, so why should they be forced to have coverage they don't need! There are many people like Ms. Johnson in Nevada, forced to pay for something they neither want, nor need.

I'm anxious to dig into the rest of Obamacare and the many other regulatory-riddled laws passed through Congress without regard for their economic impact. Nevada families shouldn't suffer because Washington bureaucrats are out of touch with reality.

I do believe smart regulations are a necessary and important part of the Federal Government's role in keeping us safe. That said, we must not allow the Federal Government to continue stifling our return to economic stability and growth. I look forward to reviewing and removing job-killing federal regulations so we can get Nevadans back to work.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate and honor a young student from Henderson, NV, who achieved national recognition for exemplary volunteer service. Kaylan Poindexter was named a Nevada finalist in the 2011 Prudential Spirit of Community Awards program, an annual honor given to the most impressive student volunteers in each state and the District of Columbia.

A senior at College Southern Nevada High School, Kaylan served as the assistant activities coordinator for Sunrise Assisted Living of Henderson. She assisted elderly residents and brightened their day with activities like baking, creating art, gardening, traveling and other special events.

Kaylan also served as a student ambassador for the 2010 Alzheimer's Association Memory Walk, and raised awareness about the disease by reaching out to students in the Clark County School District.

Given the difficult circumstances facing Nevadans today, Kaylan is an example of what makes our country great. She defies the statistics that indicate Americans today are less involved in their communities than they once were.

Kaylan, her family, friends and community should be proud of her accomplishments. The fact she was singled out from thousands of dedicated volunteers who participated in this year's program is truly praiseworthy. I applaud Kaylan for her commitment to making Henderson a better place to live, and for the positive impact she made on the lives she touched.

Madam Speaker, I rise in support of House Resolution 9, instructing the committees of jurisdiction to report legislation to replace the job-killing health care law with a more patient-centered set of reforms. This replacement resolution is the first step toward fixing the recent job-killing health care law's serious problems: more than $500 billion in cuts to Medicare, and $150 billion in cuts to Medicare Advantage; crippling taxes and mandates on small business that cost Americans jobs; and overreaching Federal policies that place bureaucrats between patients and their doctor. As a physician, I see firsthand the need to improve our country's health care system. What was signed into law last year did include some good ideas, such as: allowing dependent children to stay on their parents' insurance until the age of 26; eliminating lifetime caps on coverage; and covering individuals with pre-existing conditions. However, these policies were coupled with unsustainable spending that saddles Americans with debt, and compromises their access to quality health care. The American people deserve better, which is why we need to go back to the drawing board and develop solutions that provide stability and security for those with health

care, options for those without, and rein in spiraling costs for everyone. I urge my colleagues to vote yes on this Resolution, so that we can get Americans back to work and give them the health care system they deserve.

Mr. Speaker, increasing access to high-quality health care while reducing costs, that was the goal of the recently enacted health care law. But no matter how well-intentioned, very few now stand by that law in its entirety. The new health care law will cost money that taxpayers don't have, and it will cost jobs we can't afford to lose.

Now is the time to reexamine this misguided law before young families are forced to buy something they can't afford or face fines from their government, before seniors are forced to find new doctors or lose the kind of insurance plans they enjoy now, before small businesses shed jobs or are forced to close their doors due to budget-busting regulations.

More access, lower cost. It's safe to say that every American supports that idea. As an emergency medicine doctor, I know that I do. And working on the front lines of health care I've seen what works and what doesn't. Forcing people to buy insurance or fining them, eliminating seniors' access to Medicare Advantage, and burdening small businesses with onerous taxes don't work.

What the American people want are solutions that don't cost more taxpayer money and don't prevent small businesses from hiring new employees; making sure people don't lose their coverage once they get sick; letting dependent children stay on their parents' insurance until they turn 26; making sure anyone who wants to buy insurance can purchase a policy regardless of preexisting condition; and allowing consumers choice while creating incentives to purchase insurance that fits their needs works. Some of these solutions are there, but there is more wrong with this bill than there is right.

So let's repeal this law that doesn't work. Let's repair those pieces that could work. Let's replace it with patient-centered solutions that will work. And let's give the American people the health care they deserve.