Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Ways and Means be discharged from further consideration of the bill (H.R. 2591) to amend certain provisions of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012, and ask for its immediate consideration in the House.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Congressman Paulsen, thank you for allowing me to join you tonight.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to honor our late colleague and friend, Bill Frenzel, who faithfully and with great distinction served his constituents in Minnesota for 20 years and, I would say, served his country for a lifetime.

As you can tell from my accent, I am not from Minnesota. I am from Texas. I had a chance to meet Bill when I started on the Ways and Means Committee where I now serve with Mr. Paulsen, who is one of our, frankly, most respected members, and his predecessor, Jim Ramstad, as well, all following in the Bill Frenzel mold.

When I started on Ways and Means, I just came quickly to appreciate his willingness to share his vast wealth of knowledge on trade issues, big and small. Even though he was no longer an elected official, I was always struck by Bill's just endless willingness to give of himself, of finding ways to advance the cause of free trade and economic freedom throughout the world.

I think it is important to note that historically in Congress, trade has always been a bipartisan issue, Republicans and Democrats working together; and throughout his career, Bill's constructive work across the aisle exemplified the best of this ideal. Everyone knew he was open to new ideas, was a straight shooter, respected others, and worked hard to get people to come and arrive at a consensus.

Quite simply, Mr. Speaker, Bill was elected to do a job, and he just wanted to get things done. And, boy, did he get things done in the trade world. From working on GATT, the Uruguay Round, normal trading relations with China, NAFTA, and helping set the foundation for the World Trade Organization, Bill was at the center of the trade world as a respected Member of Congress and as a thought leader on international trade when he retired from public life.

The truth is Bill Frenzel believed in economic freedom. He believed in our right to buy, sell, and compete around the world with as little government interference as possible. He believed families should have choices, but no government anywhere should decide what is on that grocery shelf and what price you paid for it. That was your choice. That was your economic freedom.

He knew that while America was free, we would see so many ``America need not apply'' signs around the world; and he knew if we tore them down and gave our American businesses and workers--our Minnesota businesses and workers--a chance to compete, in fact, we would not just grow customers around the world, we would grow jobs here at home. So his leadership on trade, his fingerprints on all things trade can be found not only here in the United States but in foreign capitals around the world where his counsel was sought by many and he was respected by all.

Mr. Speaker, Bill's contributions to our Nation and to this body will always be remembered, and he leaves a towering trade legacy on which we can all build economic prosperity for generations to come. I hope his family understands how special he is that so many of us who you may not have known before, we all consider ourselves Bill's fans and friends.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to celebrate the life and achievements of our late former colleague and friend, Congressman Phil Crane of Illinois. My memories of Phil are twofold.

First, I will remember Phil's kindness to me as a junior Member of Congress doing my best to earn a seat on the Ways and Means Committee. As a much more senior Member, Phil was incredibly busy with his many responsibilities but he made time to talk to me, advise me and help me in any way he could so that I could join him on the committee. I have never forgotten the example he set for me during that exciting time and in turn, I have tried to do the same for our junior colleagues who talk to me about their interest in joining the committee.

And of course, I remember and respect the strong intellectual legacy he leaves behind as an early leader of our conservative movement in the United States. It was his well-informed and carefully thought out philosophy that shaped his career as an academic, elected official and presidential candidate. Near and dear to his heart was the principle of free trade which he embraced with great enthusiasm.

As a champion of free enterprise, Phil Crane understood the link between trade and open markets in advancing free institutions. In his farewell speech to this Body, he noted how trade offers the opportunity for personal contact between peoples that nurtures democratic values, and presents people in all countries with an opportunity to build a better life. He devoted himself to advancing this notion of the power of the marketplace as a catalyst for change around the globe and worked tirelessly to create opportunities for U.S. growth and high paying export-oriented jobs for U.S. workers.

During his tenure in the House, Phil was Ranking Member on the Ways and Means Trade Subcommittee for a number of years before becoming Chairman of the Trade Subcommittee in 1995. His leadership was formative in trade legislation enacted over two decades.

In his position on the Ways and Means Committee, he led the effort to pass the legislation implementing the North American Free Trade Agreement in 1993 to foster the integration of the U.S., Canadian and Mexican economies to promote growth in each member country and enhance overall North American competitiveness in the global market.

Phil Crane then led the effort in 1994 to pass the implementing legislation for the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), which established the World Trade Organization (WTO) and the global legal framework we know today that governs multilateral trade and effective trade dispute resolution.

For many years, he championed legislation to promote growth and combat narcotics trafficking through the Caribbean Basin Economic Recover Act and the Andean Trade Preferences Act. He also advanced legislation renewing the Generalized System of Preferences, which promotes development through trade-led economic growth in developing countries around the world. Phil Crane understood the way these preferential trade programs advanced a more open economic environment where U.S. firms could compete, while creating legitimate economic opportunities for people in nations struggling to overcome poverty and abject circumstances

Later, as Chairman of the Trade Subcommittee, Phil Crane was successful in the passage of the Trade and Development Act of 2000, which contained several significant component parts. Among them were the African Growth and Opportunity Act, legislation Phil authored to open a meaningful framework and dialogue for trade relations with sub- Saharan African countries; and the Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act, which he sponsored to grant Caribbean countries NAFTA parity treatment in the U.S. market to avoid an unintended consequence of Mexico's preferential access under NAFTA.

As Trade Subcommittee Chairman, Phil Crane also led the effort to Normalize trade relations with China, which established a predictable framework for trade relations between our countries through China's membership in the World Trade Organization. He also championed the Normalization of trade relations with numerous former Communist countries following the fall of the Soviet Union, including the opening of trade relations with Vietnam for the first time after the war, to help lock in market reforms in these countries.

Phil Crane was also influential in advancing the Trade Act of 2002, which authorized the negotiation of the U.S.-Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), as well as the U.S. free trade agreements now in effect with Colombia, Peru, Singapore and South Korea. The final negotiation and implementation of these landmark agreements after his departure from the House stand as a lasting testament to the path that Phil Crane forged for U.S. trade relations in the world.

A champion of the U.S. Customs and Border Protection, and its predecessor the U.S. Customs Service, Phil Crane understood not only the agency's law enforcement and security mandate, but also the important role the agency plays in supporting our economy through trade facilitation. He was a proponent throughout his tenure as Trade Subcommittee Chairman of funding customs modernization efforts, such as the Automated Commercial Environment (known as ACE), which is now operational. Throughout all of these efforts, Phil worked tirelessly to advance opportunities for U.S. growth and high paying export-oriented jobs for U.S. workers. In this process, he also spearheaded legislation for hundreds of miscellaneous tariff bills designed to further the competitiveness of U.S. firms in the global market by eliminating import duties on products used as inputs in U.S. manufacturing that could not be acquired from U.S. sources. Through such legislation and other bills which facilitated the opening of overseas markets to U.S. exports, Phil promoted U.S. workers and their ability to compete in markets around the world.

Fundamentally, Phil Crane understood the importance of trade to the U.S. economy and U.S. jobs. He also saw the economy as an important force for change in our world in advancing democratic institutions and economic freedoms overseas, while promoting high-paying export-oriented jobs here at home. His legacy on trade is with us today and will be felt by generations to come.

Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 4994) to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for standardized post-acute care assessment data for quality, payment, and discharge planning, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the subject of the bill under consideration.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of the IMPACT Act. This bill has a clever name and it will do what it says; it will have a positive impact on the Medicare program.

Much work has been done to investigate how to improve care for seniors, and last June, the Ways and Means Health Subcommittee held a hearing on care delivery after a hospitalization, or what we call post- acute care. Much like the IMPACT Act, the hearing was bipartisan and focused on post-acute reforms that the President advanced in his annual budget.

It has been over a decade since meaningful changes have been made in the care of Medicare patients after hospitalization is paid.

We have recently made progress. Site-neutral payments for long-term care hospitals and a value-based readmission program for nursing homes have been signed into law. These changes are a positive step in the right direction.

Talks of broader reform have been ongoing as concerns of the impact of the solvency of the major source of funding for this care, the Medicare hospital insurance ``HI'' trust fund, persist.

The Medicare trustees have explicitly told us the trajectory of spending from the HI trust fund is unsustainable. The trustees' current estimate is that the HI trust fund will be insolvent by 2030.

Since 2008, the trust fund has been spending more money than it has been taking in. No wonder the HI trust fund has not met the trustees' formal test of short-range adequacy since 2003.

This is a major problem. The HI trust fund is a ticking time bomb.

The IMPACT Act is not the full solution, but it is a vital step on the path toward the solution. The IMPACT Act lays the foundation for future reform.

The act establishes standard data and metrics across all of Medicare's post-hospitalization settings, including nursing homes and rehabilitation facilities. This important information will allow Congress to make future reforms armed with the facts.

We all owe it to the seniors across America to catapult the Medicare program into the 21st century, and that is exactly what this bill does.

Caring for our seniors after they are in the hospital is important, and we need to ensure the trust fund is solvent to allow us to continue to provide this care to our children and grandchildren.

This is just plain, good, commonsense policy. I am voting in favor of the IMPACT Act, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. Reed), a key member of the Ways and Means Committee and a champion for affordable health care.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume to close.

The bill began with an open letter to stakeholders, as Ranking Member Levin said. Following our bipartisan call to action, we received over 70 comments in response to our letter asking for specific recommendations to improve care for seniors.

There were three central themes that stakeholders urged us to pursue, and they are very simple:

One, create a common measure set with standardized data to assess the quality of health care, the way it is delivered;

Two, carefully research and study Medicare's post-acute settings to inform future payment and delivery system reform;

And then third, place an emphasis on informing the patient and team of caregivers during the discharge planning process in order to more effectively coordinate care.

The IMPACT Act achieves these important objectives.

Support for IMPACT comes from hospitals, nursing homes, home health care providers, leading quality groups like the National Quality Forum, and leading beneficiary advocates. I would like to highlight a few:

From the National Home Care and Hospice Association:

``We are very supportive of the goals behind the IMPACT Act and fully support the development of a uniform patient assessment and discharge planning process.''

From the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, which represents rehab physicians:

``The presence of these quality measures will ensure that patients are receiving the best possible care in the most appropriate setting.''

Finally, from the National Coalition on Health Care, which represents many Medicare beneficiary organizations:

``With this information, payers, providers, consumers, and family caregivers can work together to identify the best care setting for each individual, and policymakers can begin the challenging work of implementing broader reform to Medicare's post-acute system.''

On behalf of Chairman Dave Camp, I want to thank the ranking member, Mr. Levin, and his staff for all of their good work and thank Senator Wyden and Senator Hatch in joining us in this bipartisan, bicameral effort.

It is time to support our seniors and improve the Medicare program on which they rely. I urge my colleagues to join me and vote ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I stand today to honor Mike Hopkins, Sr.

He came into this world right outside the Texas state line on September 16, 1944, but became a Texan just as soon as he could.

Elizabeth Marie & David Flinnoye Hopkins raised a man who was a Texan deep in his heart--a man who leaves behind a legacy of achievement and purpose that his children embody.

Mike's son worked in my Washington, D.C. office and only left us to return to Texas to continue his education and start his family. Clearly he was raised right by a father who considered serving his community not just a necessity, but an honor.

Mike's personal philosophy of ``Pass-It-On'' has led many across our state to do the right thing. Because a person's legacy is all about the foundation they built with their heart and their spirit, to do the right thing for the right reasons with integrity and character

From Mike's early days in Galveston, to his studies at Texas A&M University, his service to our nation as a proud Marine, and then a community-minded business man, those who knew him and learned from him were blessed to have a true visionary as a mentor and a friend.

Many didn't know Mike was the personal driver for General O.R. Simpson. With hard work and determination, he went from Marine to barkeeper to successful businessman.

You don't win by giving up. Mike believed you won by outworking the other guy and using your head. Those who knew Mike knew his three A's of success: Ability, Aptitude and Ambition.

On July 14, 2014, Mike Hopkins, Sr. passed away peacefully in his sleep at his home in Brenham, Texas. Nina, his wife of nearly four decades was right by his side.

He leaves a strong legacy at Mike Hopkins Distributing Company and at the Wholesale Beer Distributors of Texas.

Our thoughts are with Nina, Holly, Mike Jr., and his grandson Tyler.

Mr. Speaker, I was called away yesterday, July 29, 2014, for an important meeting along with local officials at Southwest Key, a shelter in my district for youth that crossed the border illegally. I would like to submit my votes on the matters considered by the House in my absence.

For rollcall vote No. 458, ordering the previous questions on H. Res. 693--the rule providing for consideration of H.R. 4315--21st Century Endangered Species Transparency Act, I would have voted ``yea.''

For rollcall vote No. 459 on adoption of H. Res. 693--the rule providing for consideration of H.R. 4315--21st Century Endangered Species Transparency Act, I would have voted ``yea.''

For rollcall vote No. 460 on Amendment No. 2 by Rep. DeFazio (D-OR) to exclude scientific information published solely in internal Interior Department publications from the definition of ``best available science,'' I would have voted ``nay.''

For rollcall vote No. 461 on Amendment No. 3 by Rep. Holt (D-NJ) to strike a provision which includes all data submitted by State, County or Tribal governments as ``best available science,'' I would have voted ``nay.''

For rollcall vote No. 462 on Rep. Kirkpatrick (D-AZ) Motion to Recommit H.R. 4315 with instructions, I would have voted ``nay.''

For rollcall vote No. 463 on passage of H.R. 4315--21st Century Endangered Species Transparency Act, I would have voted ``yea.''

For rollcall vote No. 464 on H.R. 4809 to reauthorize the Defense Production Act, to improve the Defense Production Act Committee, I would have voted ``yea.''

Mr. Speaker, first, I want to thank the leadership of Congresswoman Jenkins' on such an important issue for families.

We have two young boys. It is expensive raising kids--it just is--all across America. I don't care what you make or where you live. This is about making it a little easier to raise your children.

You have heard today that everyone is for the child tax credit except, of course, when they have to vote for the tax credit. Then you hear every excuse in the world.

Let's look at what this bill does:

First, it makes permanent this child tax credit so people can count on it. It is indexed for inflation, so that means, when your dollar buys less and less, you shouldn't be punished by Uncle Sam because inflation is going up. It is so families can more closely keep up with the real costs of raising their kids. It eliminates the marriage penalty so Uncle Sam doesn't punish you--so the Federal Government doesn't punish you--simply because you are married and are raising your children. We think it is important that married couples who are struggling to raise families aren't punished by Uncle Sam, and it makes sure more Americans can take advantage of this.

Here is what it doesn't do:

It doesn't include the same failed stimulus programs the White House brought down upon America. As you know, we were promised the economy would be roaring. America normally bounces back from tough economic times, but not this time. This is the worst economic recovery in more than half a century.

To President Obama's unfortunate example, the worst economic recovery in this President's lifetime is his economic recovery. We are missing almost $1.5 trillion out of our economy. We are missing jobs for 5.8 million people. To put that in perspective, if the President had, like an average President, just led a C-grade type of recovery, everyone looking for work in 44 States could have a job today.

Also, as a result of this very weak recovery, do you know what a family of four in America is missing each month from its wages? $1,120. That is $1,120 that should be in a family's pocketbook to pay the rent or utilities or food or all of that. It is missing today because of this poor recovery. Some people say let's stay the course and do more of it. This bill says, no, let's change course and get people back to work, and let's help them raise their children.

The final point I would make is of this provision, including the key antifraud provision by Congressman Sam Johnson of Texas. What we know is that billions of dollars each year are being sent to people whose children don't exist. Their children don't exist. Some of the children live outside the country. Others aren't eligible for this at all. Yet Washington sends them a check--your hard-earned tax dollars. They are people who don't deserve this. Congressman Johnson's provision says you will actually give us the Social Security number--an accurate one--of that child you are seeking the help for so that we make sure the money goes to those who are eligible for it.

I don't understand sort of the pro-fraud lawmakers who say we don't need to do this, and we don't need to save those dollars. The truth is, for as hard as you work for your money--for the dollars that are out of your paycheck each week or each month--and for what you pay on April 15, your money should go to help people who deserve the help, not to children who don't exist, not to families who don't exist. This is a critical part. It saves billions of dollars.

Let's help families raise their children. Let's help our tax dollars go to the people who actually need them, and let's save some money for Uncle Sam. This bill deserves our support.

Mr. Chairman, Chairman Camp's amendment simply seeks the truth. It seeks the truth about what the IRS knew, what they targeted, what they offered up--more importantly, simply to make available those on the staff who dealt with, supposedly, the loss of these emails.

The fact of the matter is no government should ever try to silence the voices of Americans who simply disagree with it. Chairman Camp's investigation seeks the truth, to hold those accountable who violated the law, and to make sure this never happens again to any American, Republican, Democrat, any partisan stripe or independent thought.

We deserve the truth. This amendment gets to the truth, and it should be accepted by Republicans and Democrats.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank Chairman Tiberi and Chairman Camp for bringing this very important jobs bill to the floor.

The truth is, America's economy is really hurting. This is the slowest recovery, most disappointing recovery in half a century. We are missing about 5 million jobs from our economy. We have a lot of small businesses struggling. The average family of four in America is missing over $1,000 a month from their paycheck, their budget because of this disappointing recovery.

So what is missing? Well, it is not government spending. That is above where it was in 2008. It is not family spending. That is above what it was. What we are missing is business investment. When businesses along Main Street buy new buildings, new equipment, and new software to make themselves more competitive, that is when jobs occur. And that is what is missing out of the economy.

What this bill does is make it more affordable for our local businesses to immediately write off, deduct from their taxes a portion of what they buy in equipment and software and technology. That makes it more affordable, it allows them to do more of it, and that creates jobs along Main Street. And that is what this bill is all about, creating not government jobs, not temporary jobs, not stimulus jobs. This is about creating jobs along Main Street by letting our local businesses invest.

It has always been a bipartisan bill. This is an area that Republicans and Democrats agree on. Unfortunately, it is an election year. We are going to hear all of the arguments against it. But the truth is, our local businesses are struggling. They need this tax relief. And our economy needs the jobs because we are not going to get back to a balanced budget until we have more people working and more jobs created and more revenue coming in the door.

I commend our leadership for bringing this very important business bill, jobs bill, to the floor. And I urge Republicans and Democrats to come together to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for bringing this important bill, the American Research and Competitiveness Act, to the House floor.

This is a bipartisan bill. I am glad not only to be the lead sponsor, but to be working with my friend, a Democrat, John Larson from Connecticut, on this important bill. We follow in the footsteps of two other bipartisan leaders, Chairman Dave Camp and Ranking Member Sandy Levin, who carried this bill together in a bipartisan way with strong support from Republicans and Democrats.

In the day and age where we look at our smart phone or our tablet and we see sort of the impact of technology on our lives, many of us have family members and parents for whom medical breakthroughs have saved lives, lengthened lives, given back quality of life. We see people who are disabled through technology now able to live full lives and work full lives because America is innovative. This is about jobs, but it is about people as well.

America used to lead the world in research incentives, but today we have fallen to 27th. China, Russia, and other global competitors are quickly surpassing us in their share of the economy devoted to research. If we don't permanently commit to encouraging new innovation in technology, in manufacturing, in energy, in medical breakthroughs, over time we will lose our place as the largest economy in the world.

We need to make permanent this key tax incentive that encourages American companies to increase their investments in America in research and development of new product breakthroughs. When we do that, when we make this temporary provision--temporary for 34 years by the way--when we make it permanent we will create over 300,000 new American jobs and raise workers' wages by almost $10 billion.

What this bill does is it simplifies this provision so that small- and medium-size businesses can also take advantage of this credit.

According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, making it permanent will lead to a 10 percent increase in new research here in America. The fact is American companies are going to invest in research. The question is, are they going to do it in America or are they going to do it overseas? We can't allow foreign countries to take this research, the jobs that go with technology. It is time to come together--Republicans and Democrats--to make this law permanent.

I thank the chairman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I was touring a hospital in the Rio Grande Valley the other day, and we were going through the critical care unit, with young babies 25, 26 weeks old who in past years would, frankly, have never survived. But

today, because of medical breakthroughs, they will not only not have a lifetime of chronic diseases and disabilities, but they will live a full life because the medical breakthroughs and innovations developed here in America are giving them a life, frankly, their parents never hoped for.

I see our veterans coming back from war, some of them with such terrible injuries, who not only are having their lives restored but, through these remarkable prosthetics, are living full lives that, again, wouldn't have been possible in recent years, even, because we are doing innovation here in America.

Each day, we read of another U.S. company being courted to move those medical breakthroughs and that research overseas to other countries, to China, to Europe, to others. We are seeing America lose our edge in innovation, even though everyone knows--Republicans and Democrats--that the country that innovates the most will lead the world in economic growth, period. We know it.

And I look at statements such as this. And I will read this. It is a direct quote:

I believe it is critical that our tax system provide strong

incentives to help our manufacturing base. One of the most

important tax incentives for the manufacturing sector is the

research and development tax credit. Manufacturers do about

70 percent of the private sector R&D conducted in the United

States. I have long been a strong and persistent voice for

making the R&D credit a permanent part of our Tax Code and

strengthening it so that all companies have a strong

incentive to do R&D here in the United States.

That wasn't me; that wasn't Chairman Camp. That was our distinguished ranking member, Sandy Levin.

He is not alone. Democrats and Republicans together long have sought a permanent R&D tax credit to make America competitive again. Make no mistake. Today, you have heard people say this really isn't about supporting innovation, technology, biosciences and medical breakthroughs; today, it is about fiscal responsibility and pay-fors; yesterday, it was some other bills we wanted. The truth is that we can't afford these excuses, and that is what they are.

Today, it is a clear choice between those who will stand for medical innovation in America, technology innovation in America, and energy innovation and manufacturing innovation that will create good-paying jobs and good-paying wages for Americans.

I ask our Democrat colleagues to set aside the politics. We know it is an election year. Set that aside. Stay consistent with the values that you have said over and over again that the research and development tax credit needs to be made permanent, and let's send a bill to the Senate so that they, too--we can discover and learn whether they are willing to stand with their past, longtime statements that the R&D tax credit should be permanent.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor General Cecil Neely, an American hero, dedicated public servant, and a friend.

After getting his first taste of public service as President of the Madisonville High School Honor Society, Cecil first took those leadership skills to Sam Houston State University and then into the U.S. Army. Rising from Private to Brigadier General is no small feat. It takes a soldier's soldier to climb that ladder.

General Neely spent nearly three decades serving his country above and beyond the call of duty. Not only was he honored with our nation's highest peacetime award, the Distinguished Service Medal, he received the Bronze Star for valor in Vietnam, as well as the Combat Infantryman's Badge, the Parachutists' Badge, and numerous other U.S. and foreign awards.

It is no wonder this former member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is also a member of the Infantry ``Hall of Fame'' at the United States Army Infantry School.

General Neely returned to Sam Houston State University to earn his Master's degree in history. And after his retirement from the military he dove into another form of public service as County Judge of Madison County. Resolving redistricting issues and cutting property taxes while improving medical services, it took Judge Neely's work to establish a District Attorney's office and a ``one-stop'' center to bring county and state services together.

General Neely prepared Madison County--and the Brazos Valley--for the 21st century. As a chairman of the Brazos Valley Council of Governments from 2001-2002, and member from 1994-2006, Cecil Neely has led by example at every step.

Of course, he couldn't have done it all without the great support system he has in his wife, Lynn and their children, Susan, Russell, and Michael.

Our communities and our entire nation have been blessed by his service. Brigadier General Cecil Neely, thank you and job well done, sir.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to remove Congressman David Price of North Carolina as a cosponsor from H.R. 2429. His name was inadvertently added.

Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Good afternoon. The biggest challenge facing America today is a Federal Government that simply won't live within its means.

Now, spending cuts can get us back halfway to a balanced budget. But if we want to finish the job, we need to grow our economy so we can not only balance this budget, but begin paying down this dangerous $17 trillion national debt.

Under the Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act of 1978, the Joint Economic Committee, which I chair, provides analysis and recommendations about the goals and policies set forth in the Economic Report of the President to assist the House of Representatives in its consideration of this budget resolution.

During the next few moments, the members of the Joint Economic Committee will answer three questions:

Why has the Obama recovery been so weak and disappointing, when compared with past recoveries?

How would a gradual reduction of Federal spending relative to the size of our economy, as envisioned in the budget resolution, help hardworking Americans by accelerating economic growth, accelerating job creation, and increasing real wages?

And finally, how would the reforms envisioned in the Republican budget help Congress to make better tax and spending decisions in the future?

To call the current recovery a disappointment to the American people, well, it is an understatement. The current recovery ranks either dead last or near the bottom on virtually every economic measure when compared to other recoveries of the past half a century. The economy's poor performance has left the United States with an enormous growth gap.

Real gross domestic product, our economy, our output, has grown at slightly more than half the average of other recoveries. Not surprisingly, given the recovery's anemic rate of economic growth, private sector payroll employment, that is, jobs along Main Street, have also increased by only more than half the average of other recoveries.

If you look at the paychecks, what people have in their budget at home after taxes, well, for middle class Americans, for middle class people, their wages have only increased by one-third of the average of other recoveries, and less than half of the next-worst recovery.

So the middle class is struggling. But Wall Street, it is roaring. The S&P 500 Total Return Index, adjusted for inflation, has more than doubled. This, Mr. Chairman, is the recovery that left Main Street and middle class families behind.

The Joint Economic Committee has compared this recovery to the average of other recoveries over the last 50 years and has identified this dangerous growth gap.

And what is missing from the economy because of this disappointing recovery?

Our economy should be $1.3 trillion larger today, over $1 trillion larger today, if this had just been an average economic recovery, rather than dead last.

And had the number of jobs along Main Street grown at the average rate of others, we would have 5.7 million more Americans working today than what they are under this disappointing recovery.

Last month, we reached a milestone. The number of jobs along Main Street finally matched its peak from when the recession began. This milestone would be good news, except that it comes about 4 years late.

So after all these years, now 6 years, we are just back to breaking even on the number of jobs along Main Street.

If you look at the economy, proportionately, there are fewer adults working today than when the recession ended. We have actually gone backwards as an economy since the recovery supposedly began.

So no matter how you try to slice and dice the numbers, there is no hiding the fact that a smaller percentage of Americans are working today than when the recession ended.

Turning from jobs to income that hardworking families receive, this recovery, regrettably, is even more disappointing. Since the recession ended, real personal income per person has barely edged up. I think it is 3.8 percent, barely noticeable. That is less than half what it should be in an average recovery.

But what does it mean to an average family?

What it means is that the average person in America is missing over $3,000 a year from their paycheck. And an average family of four in America today is missing $1,086 a month from their family budget. Imagine that.

Imagine, for every family in America having an extra $1,000 a month to pay utilities, to save for college, for which costs are exploding, to pay for the new health care costs under the Affordable Care Act, to invest maybe in that new washer, dryer, repair that car.

$1,000 a month is missing from the average family because of the slow growth policies of the White House and, regrettably, congressional Democrats.

That is why middle class families are being left behind. That is why we can no longer stay the course in America. Families like this are missing too much money for Washington to continue to do the same old things that leave them behind.

I could fill this entire hour with different statistics that make the same point, but by every measure the recovery is so disappointing. The question is, why? What is different about it?

Well, some blame the housing bubble, its collapse and the financial panic, for the persistent weakness in our labor markets. Recoveries following the collapse of a debt-financed asset price bubble like this are typically slower than our recovery. We know that.

While the collapse of the housing bubble undoubtedly has had some lingering effects, it is not the main factor, let alone the only factor for this disappointing recovery.

What is unique about this recovery is the combination of the slow growth economic policies that President Obama has pursued.

For example, looking back from 1982 to 2000, Federal spending declined as a percentage of the economy and the private sector boomed, creating more than 37 million jobs.

Under President Obama, the opposite happened. Federal spending exploded to a post-World War II high of 24 percent of the economy, and we lost jobs.

Presidents Kennedy and Reagan, they reduced the aftertax cost for new business investment. The Joint Economic Committee has shown that there is a strong correlation between when businesses invest in building equipment and software and the creation of real jobs along Main Street.

In contrast, President Obama increased taxes on successful small businesses, on capital gains, and dividends, and slowed this recovery.

Looking back, Presidents Clinton and Reagan took a balanced approach toward environmental, health, and safety regulations. By contrast, the Obama administration has launched a regulatory tsunami; red tape at the highest levels the last 3 years, historically high, and that slowed job creation along Main Street.

Presidents Kennedy, Reagan, and Clinton opened new markets for American sales through international trade agreements. Aside from completing the agreements left unfinished by President Bush, and despite having a first-rate trade team in place, opening new markets, tearing down the ``America Need Not Apply'' sign, allowing our companies' workers to compete on a level playing field, that is now stalled under this White House.

Presidents Kennedy, Reagan, and Clinton didn't burden a weak economy with costly new entitlement programs. By contrast, President Obama rammed the Affordable Care Act through Congress on party-line votes.

The controversial Affordable Care Act is heightening uncertainty, boosting taxes by more than $1 trillion, undermining key industries like medical devices and small businesses, and causing millions of Americans, including families in my community, to lose access to doctors and to health insurance plans that they liked.

Now they are paying more for a plan they didn't ask for, and are forced to do it or pay a tax.

Notice that these past approaches to taxes and regulations, international trade were taken by both Republican and Democrat Presidents, approaches that both parties have recognized as good for our economy. Yet President Obama's actions remain remarkably out of sync with those sound policies.

He continues to stay the course, while millions of Americans, they can't find full-time work. Millions more have just given up looking for work. Fewer and fewer people are in the workforce.

It is not the elderly who are retiring, it is younger people, college graduates who spent all that time and all that money, and now they are working behind a cash register.

You have got middle class Americans, again, missing over $1,000 from their monthly budget that could be helping them meet their needs because of the President's economic policies.

What we do know, and what is incorporated in the Republican budget, is an economic policy mix that would do the opposite. It would ignite a boom in our economy through simple and well-known policy, the sound dollar that protects families against inflation and losing their purchasing power.

Gradual decline of Federal spending as a percentage of the economy, that is a key one. Tax reform that lowers the aftertax cost for business investment, grows our economy; balanced regulation and opening new markets around the world for American companies and workers--that is the best way to strengthen our economy, create millions of new jobs, and get America back on the right track again.

The budget resolution proposed by Republicans in the House says no more slow growth. No more stay the course. We will not settle for a second-rate economy.

Our families deserve better. They deserve $1,000 more a month, and this is the path to get us there.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chair, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Paulsen), a key member of the Joint Economic Committee, a businessman who knows that more than half of Americans today believe we are still in a recession, that they have given up and feel like this country is surrendering, and he knows the impact.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, we hear all the votes and the claims from our Democrat friends about how great the economy is going and what great leadership they have shown from the White House to get people back to work. They claim millions and millions and millions of jobs, but Americans don't feel that way and for good reason.

Let's put all this job surge in perspective. Now, here is the average economy recoveries--because America does face tough times from time to time. We normally bounce back pretty strongly, but not this time and not under this President.

If you look at job creation in the last 4 years, this is the average of the other recoveries. This is the Reagan average. That was real economic growth, and as you can tell, only twice in the last 4 years or more has the Obama recovery even met average.

Only 2 months out of more than 4 years has this recovery even been merely average, and it has never reached the real strong growth of the Reagan recovery because unemployment, by the way, reached higher points in this recession.

So, clearly, by underperforming, by being so disappointing, what this chart really shows is the millions of Americans--middle class Americans--who have been left behind by this disappointing recovery. You look at this and you wonder: Well, so what does this mean to the economy?

In the next chart, I will show you what is missing. People back home and people all across America are saying that you have got to get this economy going, it is just hurting us so badly; but because, again, this President and our Democratic friends choose to slow the growth of America, we are now missing, gosh, almost $4 trillion--$3.7 trillion, to be exact, is missing from our economy.

That should be in our Main Street businesses. It ought to be in our small businesses. It ought to be driving our economy, instead of trailing China. Instead of being lectured by the rest of the world, America should have a strong economy by now. This is a disappointing recovery.

The Republican budget actually starts to restrain spending and has tax reform to grow the economy. While you have heard some claim that trillions of dollars of cuts will devastate the Federal safety net, the truth is that the Republican budget over the next 10 years grows by about 3 percent a year. That is because America's population is growing as well.

Only in Washington is growth and spending a cut. What it does is it cuts the waste, fraud, and abuse in this big, flat, bloated government, and it makes smart investments, though, in defense, in Medicare, and in infrastructure.

Our Democrat friends are crying today for more emergency unemployment benefits, but those benefits are for when the unemployment rate is going up and getting higher, but, today, in all 50 States, that rate is going down and going lower. What we should be focusing on is getting people back to work, not a check, but a good-paying job.

Instead, the White House has obstinately blocked the Keystone XL pipeline and those thousands of jobs. They have obsessively pushed the Affordable Care Act on our small businesses who are cutting hours, cutting workers, cutting wages, and hurting the economy--and then all the new regulation.

The Republican budget preserves Medicare and Medicaid, and for Medicaid, which is our health care for the poor, the budget grows for them, but it does an important thing. It gives back to the States the ability to tailor health care for their States to meet their patients in their communities and in their regions. That is the way it ought to be done.

The Democrats hollow out our defense, hollow out our intelligence system, and ignore our veterans. The Republican budget restores our military strength to the presequester levels. We focus on our veterans in America. They deserve no less.

The Republican budget saves Medicare both for those who are in or near retirement, but, more importantly, for those who wonder if Medicare will be there for them. It offers options for younger workers, including just staying in traditional Medicare or tailoring a plan that is right for them and their families.

The Democrats ignore the challenges facing America. They ignore this disappointing recovery. They say: just stay the course, the country is doing fine.

But the country isn't doing fine. Our families, they aren't doing fine at all, and they are missing $1,000 a month from their paychecks because this White House and this Democrat Senate continue to stay the course.

Let's change the course for America.

I reserve the balance of my time.

May I inquire as to the time remaining?

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 4 minutes.

Amid all the predictions of doom and gloom, the truth is the Republican budget grows by 3 percent a year over the next decade. It doesn't shrink; it grows. The population grows, and so that makes sense.

It does cut wasteful spending, and there is a lot of wasteful spending to cut. More importantly, it grows the economy and tackles the biggest challenge America has, which is a broken Tax Code. This resolution begins to rein in the IRS.

This budget begins to save Social Security and Medicare for families and younger generations so they can count on them, and it makes sure that we don't hollow out our defense. This is the only budget that balances. More importantly, it is the only budget that says that is not enough. It begins to pay down the national debt, and it says our goal in America will be to have a debt-free America. Think about that. After all these years of dangerous deficits, America could be debt free, economically the strongest in the world, and financially the strongest in the world.

But today, if we don't change course, look what happens. Today, a baby born in Woodlands, Texas, their share of the debt is almost $50,000. A new baby owes Uncle Sam a Lexus. If we don't change our ways, by the time that child is 13, that child will owe Uncle Sam a second Lexus. By the time that child is 22, finishing college and beginning to start their life and live their dreams, they will owe Uncle Sam another Lexus.

Now, the good news is young people don't actually buy luxury sedans for the Federal Government, but they pay the price in a very different way. All that debt slows the economy, so there will be fewer jobs for them to compete for; and all of that debt means higher taxes and higher interest rates, so there will be fewer jobs to compete for, and they will have less money in their paycheck as a result.

Our Democrat friends say: that is fine, let's stay the course; let's not change anything; the economy is great; our deficits are fantastic, and our country is going the right direction.

But that is not the truth in America today. We need to spend less as a government in a smart way. We need to grow the economy in a strong way. We can't ignore the challenges facing us. We have to save Medicare and Social Security. This is the budget that grows America's future and doesn't shrink it. This is the budget that America needs. We can't afford to stay the course.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute.

I might point out that President Bush did not leave this country with a deficit; Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her Democrat colleagues left this Nation with a deficit. And it continued to grow. The first year of their governance, the deficit doubled. The second year, it tripled. Then it went to a trillion dollars, trillion dollars, and trillion dollars. And only under a Republican House have we started to cut the growth in the deficit today.

The truth is, on immigration reform, Democrats held the Presidency, the House and the Senate, and they did nothing. When it comes to reducing the deficit, they held the House, the Senate, and the White House, and they did nothing. When it comes time to grow the economy and give the middle class a fighting chance, they held the House and the Senate and the Presidency and did nothing.

Let's not stay the course, because that has got us going the wrong direction. We need to change it. The Republican budget does that.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

You know, I know the facts hurt. I know they hurt, Mr. Whip. The deficit doubled the first year under Speaker Pelosi and your leadership.

The deficit tripled under your leadership.

I know the facts hurt. I know these deficits hurt real people. And I know the Democrats now want to revise history: they didn't create the deficits; they didn't create this slow economic recovery; everything is going great. But it is not.

You created record deficits. You took what was turning into lower and lower deficits and a trend toward a balanced budget and you exploded it, and our American families are hurting today. Millions more can't find a job. Young people with college degrees are working behind a cash register. The deficits are frightening and scaring America. It came under Democrat leadership and it has continued under this Democrat Presidency. I know the facts hurt, but those are the facts.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

The President doesn't allocate funding. He doesn't spend one dime Congress doesn't give him. A Republican Congress balanced the budget for President Clinton. And under President Bush, a Democrat Congress doubled and tripled and then went to trillion-dollar deficits. This Congress, your legislative branch, you passed a nearly trillion-dollar stimulus without one Republican vote. You passed trillions of dollars with the Affordable Care Act that has continued to destroy the economy and drive deficits even higher. That is the truth. Those are the facts. I know they hurt, but we are not revising history today. We are talking about changing the course of this country away from deficits, away from this second-rate economy toward a country that actually can grow, and grow stronger.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds.

Mr. Whip, I am your huckleberry. I will be glad to have the debate with you in a Special Order or anywhere else. The fact is this country is struggling. Your leadership has failed us as a Democrat governance in this White House. It is time to change course.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to my friend from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).

I would inquire of the gentlelady if you would like to make your concluding remarks, or have you done so?

I will close out as well, and I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, if you like the direction the country is going, I guess there is no reason to change. If we want young people who don't believe they will ever earn as much or have a standard of living as their parents do, let's just stay the course. If we want a Nation with a second-rate economy where millions of people have given up looking for work, where the average family is missing over $1,000 every month from their paycheck, let's just stay the course. If we want a Nation that continues that debt and debt and debt and debt--we are now becoming financially weaker each year rather than financially stronger--well then let's stay the course. If you want a Medicare and Social Security that a lot of younger people have given up hope will be there for them and many seniors are worried won't last for them either, well then let's just stay the course. And if we want a President who will hollow out our defense and our intelligence, who will continue to waste money the taxpayers have earned, then let's just stay that course.

Or we can take a different direction for this Nation. We can impose smart spending cuts that actually get us back toward a balanced budget. We can grow the economy through tax reform and balanced regulation that actually gets Main Street pumping again, gives people hope again.

We believe there is a brighter future for America, but first it starts with living within our means, it begins with growing this economy, and it concludes with increasing the wages of women and men and fathers and sons and young people and women and minorities who now today have given up hope.

The Republican budget is about opportunity. It is about not giving up on America, it is about not settling for a second-rate economy in a financially strapped Nation that can no longer compete against China, Brazil, Europe, and our other competitors around the world. It really is about changing the direction of this Nation in a way that gives power to people, that gives power to Main Street, gives power to middle class families rather than taking it all for Washington.

We know the path we are on isn't working. We can no longer stay the course. It is time to change so the Republican budget spends less, grows the economy, solves the biggest challenges in America, and gives us hope that America can continue to be the strongest economy in the world through the next 100 years.

That is the goal America should be setting, that is the direction the Republican budget puts in place. It uses two smart, I think, revolutionary ideas: dynamic scoring, so we know the real-life effect of this budget and our growth; it focuses on controllable spending as a percentage of the economy, that is the right way to measure how we are doing as a Nation; and it uses a number of innovative approaches, again, to grow the economy, to shrink the deficit, and what I like most of all, it doesn't merely balance the budget, it puts us on a path to a debt-free America. That is something that can give us hope, that can give us opportunity, that is the direction that we ought to go.

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.