Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I'm proud to be a co-chairman of the Death Tax Coalition in the U.S. House, those of us who understand the destructive levels of this tax on our family farms and small businesses in America.

Can you imagine working your whole life risking your money and your time working your weekends to either build your family farm or to start your business only to find out when you die, Uncle Sam swoops in and takes nearly half of all you spent a lifetime building up, takes half of what you had hoped to give to your children and grandchildren?

That is the death tax in America. It is the wrong tax. It is the wrong people at exactly the wrong time.

The only real solution to it is to fully and permanently repeal it, to solve it once and for all, to give family farms, small businesses, women and minority-owned businesses the peace of mind of knowing that they can hand down to their children the nest egg they have spent a life of toil, risk and taxation to build up.

That is what Republicans support. That is what we are going to vote for today. And it is time to bury the death tax once and for all.

As they set the rules for this debate today, we naively think that Congress is a debate of ideas, the best ideas win. Unfortunately, the American public won't get to hear that debate or have that choice today because the Democrat majority did not allow an amendment, a bipartisan amendment, a better idea in how we help our family farms and small businesses survive.

This amendment was offered, a bipartisan one, by Congresswoman Shelley Berkley of Nevada, myself, Congressman Artur Davis of Alabama, and Congressman Devin Nunes of California. And it's an amendment supported by the groups that are most damaged by this death tax, small businesses, family farms, local printers and grocers and others. And what it did is provide a $5 million exemption for the death tax and a below-35 percent tax rate in permanence.

This is an amendment to a bill that has strong bipartisan support. It is has 37 cosponsors, and it has strong support from around the country. So when people say today, this is the best we can do? No, it's not.

It's not the best we can do. Given a choice, we have to do better for our family farms and small businesses. And there is no support for the overall bill from small businesses, family farms, from our local retailers, none at all. So rather than place on the floor a bipartisan bill that had broad support, they chose to offer a partisan bill that has no support.

It is time to solve this problem. It's time to bury the death tax once and for all. It's time to hear better ideas on this floor that can help create jobs in America, help generations go forward, and reward the people who work the hardest, work the longest, and work the smartest in hopes of handing nest eggs down to their children. The death tax is not just unfair; it is immoral and un-American.

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

I rise in opposition to this bill.

Can you imagine working your whole life to keep your family farm or to build up a small business, and then when you die Uncle Sam swoops in and takes up as much as half of all you've spent a lifetime working for? That's what the death tax does. It is wrong, it is immoral, and in many ways un-American.

This was brought home to me early in my first term in Congress. I had a family nursery in Texas. They have three nurseries. The parents had created it and built it up. Two of the three kids were working in it that day, and they just sat down with a pen and paper. They showed me the value of their nursery, talked about the death tax, and worked it through. And the bottom line was that if they could take out enough insurance on their parents' deaths, and because they're out of debt, if they could go back to the bank and borrow enough money, they might be able to pay their death tax bill.

Think of what they're saying: If we make enough money off our parents' death and we can borrow enough money, the government might let us keep our family business. The government might let us keep our family business. That's why the death tax is wrong, and that's why it is in many cases, if not all, simply un-American.

Today we have a bill that is the result of hard work by my friend from North Dakota (Mr. Pomeroy), but I object because I believe we can do better.

Some say at the end of the day if this bill passes, it will only impact a few estates. But the truth is, when it passes, still, the number one reason family farms and small businesses will not be passed down to the next generation is the death tax; and the number one reason the fastest growing number of entrepreneurs, women, and minority-owned businesses will not be passed down to the next generation. And this is the first generation of wealth building. It will be the same death tax.

While it is fun to hear them talk about Bill Gates and Donald Trump and George Soros, the people most hurt by this tax are Bill the farmer or Donna the florist or George the funeral director, real people building wealth in our communities who oppose this death tax. These are not the aristocracies that are being referred to in this debate.

We are told that this bill will be permanent and provide certainty. Well, it does create a permanently high tax

rate and a permanently destructive tax rate; 45 percent is simply too high. And because, like the AMT, it is not indexed for inflation, it is certain to ensnare more and more family farms and small businesses in future generations. We have seen this play before. The alternative minimum tax was created to tackle and address only 100-plus of the wealthiest Americans in the United States, but because it wasn't indexed for inflation, today it would impact 24 million middle class Americans. We are going to see that same creep, those same small businesses and middle American families affected by this death tax in future generations.

We are told, and I think sincerely, that this is the best we can do as a Congress. I don't believe it is. I so much appreciate Mr. Pomeroy's efforts. I know a lot of the groups that make up the death tax coalitions that are working to eliminate the death tax or find a reasonable compromise. They appreciate what he is doing as well. But we have to do better. And don't take my word for it. If you listen to the groups most intimately damaged by the death tax, from our Farm Bureau to our National Federation of Independent Businesses, from our grocers and funeral directors, from local newspapers and other groups, they have not given support to this bill because it still leaves intact the third highest death tax rate in the developed world, and it damages them too greatly.

My thought is that rather than place on the floor, as Democrats did, unfortunately, a partisan bill that is supported by none of the groups most affected, that we ought to have offered a bill by the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Berkley) and the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Davis) and others that has the strong support of 49 national organizations and bipartisan support of the bill. Unfortunately, it was not allowed as an amendment to the bill and it would be ruled out of order as a motion to recommit, so we don't have an opportunity to come together as a Congress on this issue.

At this time, I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself 15 seconds.

I would point out that more and more Americans will be ensnared in the death tax because it is not indexed, like the AMT. And I would point out, we would not be here today if President Clinton had not vetoed the death tax repeal in 1999.

I yield myself an additional 15 seconds.

And I would further point out that polls consistently show 70 percent of Americans support the complete and full repeal of the death tax because it is un-American for this country to swoop in and take up nearly half of what you have spent a lifetime building up and wanting to hand down to your children and grandchildren.

With that, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California (Mr. Herger) who has worked on the death tax issue as a senior member of the Ways and Means Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the lead Republican on the Small Business Committee, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Graves).

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

I know Washington takes great delight in reading from comments from the very wealthy who, by the way, usually find loopholes by accountants and have whole planning teams to make sure they don't pay these taxes. But I like to listen to those who are actually struggling with these death taxes, our small businesses, our family farms and our local manufacturers who have got a lot of challenges.

I have a letter from the National Federation of Independent Business which has weighed in on almost every key issue dealing with the impact on small businesses and independent businesses. Like me, they do appreciate the work that Mr. Pomeroy has done on this issue. But just quoting from their letter: ``While well intentioned, H.R. 4154 is an incomplete solution. A $3.5 million exemption per person and a 45 percent rate do not provide adequate protection for many small businesses. In addition, the $3.5 million exemption is not indexed for inflation, meaning that protection from the estate tax will erode each year.''

Our manufacturing groups, for example, National Association of Manufacturers, in a letter they wrote, again, yesterday, say: ``The NAM, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Nation's largest industrial trade association representing small and large manufacturers in every industrial sector and in all 50 States, urges you to oppose H.R. 4154,'' the bill we have before us today.

``While NAM appreciates efforts to provide certainty by making estate tax rates permanent, we do not view a 45 percent rate or an exemption that is not indexed to inflation as efforts that will achieve significant reform.''

And finally, the American Farm Bureau Federation, again, family farmers all throughout this country are involved, again, in trying to help them keep those family farms, pass them down to the next generation, say that the current estate tax exemption is $3.5 million per person and the top tax rate is 45 percent under this bill. This exemption level is inadequate to protect our Nation's farms and ranches from estate taxes and causes financial burden of complicated and expensive estate tax planning.

It is clear while we may claim on this floor that this is a bill great for family farms and great for small businesses, and only taxing the wealthy, our family farms, our small businesses, our local manufacturing companies say it does not.

National Federation of

Independent Business,

Washington, DC, December 2, 2009.

Dear Representative: On behalf of the National Federation

of Independent Business (NFIB), the nation's leading small

business advocacy organization, I am writing to share our

views about H.R. 4154, the Permanent Estate Tax Relief for

Families, Farmers, and Small Businesses Act of 2009.

With the current estate tax law expiring after 2010, H.R.

4154 provides certainty to help small business owners plan

for the tax and maintains stepped-up basis. While well-

intentioned, H.R. 4154 is an incomplete solution. A $3.5

million exemption per person and a 45 percent rate do not

provide adequate protection for many small businesses. In

addition, the $3.5 million exemption is not indexed for

inflation, meaning that protection from the estate tax will

erode each year.

NFIB has always supported full repeal of the estate tax as

the one solution that will protect all small businesses from

this tax. Short of that, NFIB has supported H.R. 3905, a

bipartisan compromise bill which provides an exemption level

of $5 million per person and a rate of 35 percent. Much of

the cost of the estate tax occurs before the tax is levied

because the threat of the tax forces families to pay for

expensive estate planning to ensure their business stays with

the family. Such costs are a drain on the finances of many

already struggling small businesses, and relief along the

lines of H.R. 3905 would provide additional protection for

many small businesses.

NFIB is encouraged that the House of Representatives is

acting on this important small business issue by providing

long-term estate planning certainty. We look forward to

working with Congress to improve the legislation so that it

meets the needs of America's small businesses.

Sincerely,

Susan Eckerly,

Senior Vice President, Public Policy.

Yielding myself 15 seconds, I would like to submit for the Record a list of 49 organizations from family farmers to small businesses to local funeral parlors in support of Congresswoman Berkley's bill and amendment.

Family Business Estate Tax Coalition

American Farm Bureau Federation; American Foundry Society;

American Hotel & Lodging Association; American International

Automobile Dealers Association; American Rental Association;

American Wholesale Marketers Association; Associated Builders

and Contractors; AMT--Association for Manufacturing

Technology; Association of Equipment Manufacturers; Comporium

Group/Rock Hill Telephone Company; Financial Executive

International's Committee on Private Company Policy.

Food Marketing Institute; Heating, Airconditioning &

Refrigeration Distributors International; Independent

Community Bankers of America; Independent Insurance Agents &

Brokers of America; International Franchise Association;

Marine Retailers Association of America; Mason Contractors

Association of America; Mortgage Bankers Association;

National Association of Convenience Stores; National

Association of Manufacturers; National Association of

Wholesaler-Distributors.

National Automobile Dealers Association; National Beer

Wholesalers Association; National Cattlemen's Beef

Association; National Electrical Contractors Association;

National Federation of Independent Business; National Funeral

Directors Association; National Grocers Association; National

Lumber and Building Material Dealers Association; National

Newspaper Association; National Restaurant Association;

National Roofing Contractors Association.

National Small Business Association; National

Telecommunications Cooperative Association; National Utility

Contractors Association; Newspaper Association of America;

North American Die Casting Association; Plumbing-Heating-

Cooling Contractors--National Association; Policy and

Taxation Group; Printing Industries of America; S Corporation

Association; Society of American Florists; The Associated

General Contractors of America; The Bowling Proprietors'

Association of America.

At this time, I would like to yield 2 minutes to one of the outstanding members of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam).

The two questions we ought to ask ourselves when we consider this bill, besides the principle underneath it, which is should family farms and small businesses work their whole life, build up a nest egg and have Uncle Sam swoop in when they die and take up nearly half of it themselves, is this supported by the people whom you say it will help, and will this bill or can this bill become law?

As to the first case, it is not supported by the organizations that have worked the longest and the hardest on the death tax. And we have, again, 49 organizations who support a bipartisan compromise who unfortunately cannot support this bill, small businesses, family farms, local newspapers, local marketing groups, equipment manufacturers, local builders and auto dealers. We have local convenience stores and beer wholesalers, our cattlemen, just the people who make up the fabric of our local economies believe this bill will not help them and will not help them enough.

But the other thought is, will this bill become law? And the answer, unfortunately, is no. H.R. 4154 is dead on arrival in the Senate. Even if it squeaks through the House with whatever arm twisting must be done, it will be dead on arrival in the Senate. Earlier this year the Senate voted on a bipartisan basis for a far more generous estate tax relief package. The Lincoln-Kyl amendment to the Senate's budget resolution, which mirrors the Berkley-Brady amendment that was not allowed to be offered today, provides a considerably higher exemption and a more reasonable 35 percent rate.

It's very unlikely that the Senate is going to take a break from health care and other issues to pass a bill that they have serious concerns about, and especially because they have serious concerns as well about this PAYGO sham language that is attached. Also, recent press reports make clear that key Senators, even Democratic Senators, believe that this bill, H.R. 4154, is insufficient.

According to a December 22 article in the BNA, it's quoted that the House plan to make permanent the 2009 estate tax rate exemption levels falls far short of what is needed in the long run and quotes key Senators in that Chamber. So, I think our goal ought to be helping the people we say we're trying to help: family farmers and small businesses. And we ought to be pushing a bill forward that can be accepted by the Senate, make it to the President's desk, and provide that certainty that helps these people.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield myself as much time as I may consume.

We have short memories around here. While I know it's sort of popular to blame President Bush for everything from acid reflux to Tiger Woods' car accident, the truth of the matter is we wouldn't be here today if President Clinton had not vetoed the full permanent repeal of the death tax once and for all for America. A Republican Congress sent him that bill saying the only peace of mind we can give to family farmers and small businesses is to put this death tax to death. But because of his actions and irresponsible veto, today we see a high tax rate and low exemptions and real damage upon America's family farms and small businesses.

We talk about fiscal responsibility. I just heard some more rhetoric about that. Now, let me point out that while Republicans, unfortunately, in responding to the terrorist attacks of 9/11 and creating a Homeland Security Department, I believe, while well- intentioned in defense of this country, also spent too much money. And you can tell from these red bars how once that mistake was made, the deficit, year after year, went down. In the first year Democrats had control of Congress the deficit went from 162 to 459. It tripled in 1 year that House and Senate, they tripled the deficit. This year it is

almost nine times higher than when Republicans left

Congress.

So, when I hear a lecture on fiscal responsibility, after a $1.4 trillion deficit, a quarter of a trillion dollar unpaid bill 2 weeks ago for the doctor fix, an unprecedented spending spree, bailouts, and PAYGO rules that have less credibility than all the fake stimulus jobs we hear about, please, no lectures. And when you talk about statutory PAYGO, I'll remind Members how many violations of PAYGO have occurred. Two dozen of them in the last couple of years by this Congress, supposedly fiscally responsible.

And you know the way they got around it? In some cases they used the same PAYGO 25 different times. That's like mortgaging your house 25 times to

the bank as collateral. They used some PAYGO 10 different times. In fact, one time, to try to look like they balanced the bill, this Congress, on this floor, with this leadership, decreed that there will be no terrorist attacks for the next 5 years so that this bill can look like it was paid for.

So, please, no lectures on fiscal responsibility from a Congress and a White House that is ruining this country, driving us so deep into debt I don't know how our grandchildren will ever get out of it.

I think the main point today that I will refute as well is that this is the only option. The truth of the matter is that there is a bipartisan bill that has support of some 39 or so Members of this House, supported by so many of the groups, family farms, small businesses, local nurseries, home builders, and retail shops, that does have support in the House and in the Senate. That's the compromise that should be on the floor today. That's the way we make sure we help our family small businesses.

And let me tell you, too, whenever Washington says we're only going after a few of the wealthy, grab your pocketbooks because we've seen this run before. And the alternative minimum tax was supposed to tax 100 or so of the wealthiest Americans, as we just heard. Today that tax can grab almost 24 million Americans. We're going to see every year more and more family farms, more and more small businesses trapped, damaged, destroyed by this death tax unless this bill is voted down. And we have other options that really can help.

I reserve the balance of my time.

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

I would say while I disagree strongly with some of those assertions, I do very much appreciate the work that Mr. Pomeroy has done on this bill. It is an issue that concerns so many of us. I am hopeful we can still come together on a bipartisan compromise that can pass this House, and for many of us who have as our goal full and permanent repeal of the death tax, I hope someday to work with him on that as well.

I yield back the remainder of my time.

Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, this conversation is not about doctors. It's about a budget gimmick to try to hide the true cost of Nancy Pelosi's health care takeover. There is a right way and there is a wrong way to help our doctors get paid fairly under Medicare. But because not one dime of this bill is paid for, it forces Americans to borrow another $279 billion from China and pass the bill of debt down to our grandchildren to pay, all to hide the cost of this health care reform in Washington.

This is irresponsible, and it's the wrong way. I support the Republican alternative. We give our doctors cost-of-living increases, but we pay for them by chasing frivolous lawsuits that drive up the costs of medicine out of our system. So we help our doctors and we help the patients at the same time.

And I want to finish with this: This Medicare, the way we pay our doctors, it's a great taste, sort of a look into the future of what happens when the government is going to run your health care decisions. Not paying doctors fairly is how Medicare rations care today, and it's the main reason seniors have difficulty finding a doctor. This is a peek into the future when Medicare makes budget decisions about your life and death medical decisions. This is the future, and it's frightening.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 909, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor two great southeast Texans. Every weekday morning for more than a quarter century, Texans have started their mornings off by tuning into JP Pritchard & Lana Hughes for the latest news. These two consummate radio professionals have been there for us through Hurricanes Alicia, Rita and Ike and Tropical Storm Allison, the most destructive tropical storm in U.S. History. They've kept Houston in the know through good economic times and bad--winning more national, state, and local awards than they have time to count or shelf space to display.

Lana Hughes, a native southeast Texan, is a graduate of Conroe High School in the Eighth Congressional District and Baylor University. She got her start in journalism working for the Conroe Courier and KIKR Radio before joining KTRH in the early 1980s. An avid fan of the NASA Human Space Flight Program, Lana can cite stats on every mission, but her greatest passion is saving animals. Her blog, Animal House, has placed numerous pets into loving homes and informed all of southeast Texas about the problems of abused, neglected, and abandoned animals. If Lana is not in the newsroom, she can found volunteering at a local animal shelter or getting one of her many friends to fall in love with a new four-legged family member.

JP Pritchard got to Texas as fast as he could and once here he stayed. A graduate of Drake University and the broadcasting school of hard knocks, JP and his lovely bride, Esther, have three sons and two grandsons who are the apple of their grandfather's eye. His first job in southeast Texas was as reporter/anchor and news director of KULF Radio, now known as KBME, The Sports Animal. From there, he joined the KTRH team where he has been ever since.

While he enjoys anchoring the news, JP is also proud of his documentary work having won top honors for his 2-hour special on the history of Houston. JP has been used to having his name be ``JP & Lana'' for more than a quarter century.

Together, these two amazingly talented people have become family members to millions in southeast Texans who instinctively tune to NewsRadio 740 AM, KTRH whenever news is breaking.

Mr. Speaker, this is the Pelosi health care plan, and it's wrong for America. Over 100 new Federal agencies, commissions, and mandates standing between you and your doctor.

This huge, inefficient new bureaucracy makes your health care insurance more expensive, forces millions of Americans into a government-run plan, raises taxes on workers and small businesses, increases Medicare drug costs for seniors, adds billions to our frightening deficit, and after throwing $1 trillion at the problem, still leaves 18 million Americans uninsured. Big government doesn't mean better health care.

To pay for this massive new bureaucracy, Democrats slash Medicare for our elderly by a half-trillion dollars. That means 660,000 Texas seniors are going to lose their plan. It shuts 40 doctor-owned hospitals in Texas, costing us 15,000 jobs. And 1.5 million Texans will have their plans disappear.

This is not the reform families need. Instead, this is all about taking the giant first step toward a single-payer national health care system. If the Pelosi plan passes, Washington will ultimately decide which doctors you can see, what treatments you deserve, and what medicines you receive, and when you're sick, will you be worth their cost?

House Republicans have a different vision. We listened. Ours is a careful, step-by-step solution to the complex issue of health care, focusing first on lowering your health care costs so more can afford it. We have no tax increases, no Medicare cuts, no rationing, no mandates, no huge intrusion of government into the most intimate parts of your health care, just more choices, more fairness, less lawyers. Best of all, our Republican plan is the only reform that actually lowers your health care premiums and lowers the deficit.

We need to get health care reform right the first time. The Pelosi plan is wrong.

Madam Speaker, I would like to honor Mr. Robert ``Bob'' Williams, a long-time resident of The Woodlands, Texas, and a dear friend. The Woodlands was lucky enough to gain Mr. Williams as a resident when he moved from Chicago after being director of the Chicago YMCA for 25 years. It wasn't long after Mr. Williams came to The Woodlands, that he helped establish the first YMCA.

Among Mr. Williams' firsts in The Woodlands are that he was a founding member of the Woodlands Community Presbyterian Church and one of the original Hometown Heroes of The Woodlands--he was awarded this honor because of his commitment to the community. Mr. Williams is an Eagle Scout, World War II veteran, and lifelong Kiwanis Club member.

Mr. Williams has been very active in the Kiwanis Club in The Woodlands from the beginning. He founded The Woodlands' first Kiwanis Club and has served the club and the community for 53 years as a highly distinguished member. Mr. Williams has directed The Woodlands' Kiwanis Prayer Breakfast for 18 years. He also helped charter the Kiwanis Key Clubs in four Woodlands High Schools to teach our young students how important it is to serve your community. His life was a direct example for those students because they saw him serving others tirelessly--and well past retirement.

Mr. Williams has a heart for youth and spent his life encouraging them-- through Kiwanis Key Clubs, Special Olympics, and the YMCA. He is a great role model, mentor and undoubtedly has impacted countless lives, young and old.

At age 85, he traveled to Haiti to represent Kiwanis International to work on Iodine Deficiency. And on his 90th birthday, he even held a food drive for Interfaith of The Woodlands, turning his birthday celebration into a time to help others--now this is a man who never stops serving others and is an example to us all.

As you can see, he has committed endless hours to teaching our youth, even after the age of 90. He recently celebrated his 91 birthday and after a lilfetime of community service he is finally taking some time to slow down.

The Woodlands truly benefited from his relocation to our community, and as he gets ready to move, we regret that we will lose a great community servant and true friend.

Madam Speaker, it is an honor to recognize Mr. Williams and his countless contributions to the people of The Woodlands. I urge you to join me in recognizing Bob Williams for his many years of service, even after the age of 90.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the Texas Marines Medal of Honor Monument in The Woodlands, Texas. Marines Thomas R. Early, Burt Cabanas, Jim O'Connor and Bill Leigh were instrumental in bringing the monument to The Woodlands. It is truly inspirational to know that this monument is now in existence due to the determination of these local Marines who brainstormed this one of a kind monument as a fitting tribute to all Texas Marines.

The monument was dedicated on May 25, 2007, at Town Green Park to pay tribute to seventeen Texans awarded the Medal of Honor, the highest military decoration awarded by the United States government. It stands to pay reverence to these men including five Marines from World War II, four Marines and one Navy Corpsman from the Korean War, and seven Marines from the Vietnam War.

One can hardly pass the Texas Marines Medal of Honor Monument without feeling an overwhelming sense of appreciation for the sacrifice of these brave patriots as you stand before the monument and read the seventeen names engraved in gold.

The Marines honored are as follows:

SSGT William James Bordelon, 22, San Antonio; PFC Charles Howard Roan, 21, Claude; 1st LT Jack Lummus, 29, Ennis; SGT William George Harrell, 22, Rio Grande City; 1st LT William Deane Hawkins, 29, El Paso; 1st LT Frank Nicias Mitchell, 29, Indian Gap; SSGT

Ambrosio Guillen, 23, El Paso; PFC Whitt Lloyd Moreland, 21, Waco; 2nd LT George Herman O'Brien, Jr., 26, Fort Worth; Hospitalman John Edward Kilmer, 21, Houston; PFC Alfred Mac Wilson, 21, Abilene; LCPL Thomas Elbert Creek, 18, Amarillo; SGT Alfredo (Freddy) Gonzalez, 21, Edinburg; LCPL Richard Allen Anderson, 21, Houston; PFC Oscar Palmer Austin, 21, Nacogdoches; 2nd LT Terrence Collinson Graves, 22, Corpus Christi; LCPL Miguel Keith, 18, San Antonio

On top of this monument stands a sculpture of the Marine Corps official emblem--the eagle, globe and anchor. The eagle with spread wings resting on top of the world reminds us what our Marines do for us--they protect us at all costs.

I hope that as families use Town Green Park in the future, they look upon the monument with pride and honor these brave soldiers by reflecting on all those serving in our Armed Forces. Parents will impress upon their children the great honor bestowed on these great individuals from the Lone Star State and tell them how admirable it is that these men have sacrificed much to allow us all to freely walk, worship and live in America.

Madam Speaker, it is an honor to recognize the Texas Marines Medal of Honor Monument in the U.S. House of Representatives. I urge you to join me in remembering these seventeen Texans who received the Medal of Honor as well as all of our Marines and other servicemen and servicewomen for the sacrifices they have made for the people of the United States of America.

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

(Mr. BRADY of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of key parts of this legislation.

The bill before us today offers long-term unemployment workers in all States 14 weeks of additional unemployment benefits and provides 20 additional weeks of benefits in high unemployment States. In all, with the passage of this bill, a record total of up to 99 weeks of Federal and State unemployment benefits will be paid in a total of 29 States and territories where the unemployment rate is 8.5 percent or greater. In the State of Texas, where the unemployment rate is 8.2 percent, it would provide an additional 14 weeks of unemployment benefits for the long-term unemployed who continue to struggle to find a new job.

In addition, the bill we are considering today includes a number of important tax relief provisions that will help families, businesses, and our economy as a whole. This bill will extend the $8,000 homebuyer tax credit, which is currently scheduled to expire just a few short weeks from now, until the middle of next year. It will also create a new $6,500 tax credit that will help current homeowners who have lived in their homes for at least 5 years to

move up into new homes. And especially with Veterans Day coming up next week, I'm pleased this bill includes a number of homeownership provisions that would specifically benefit the brave men and women who serve in our Armed Forces.

Taken all together, this bill's homeownership tax relief provisions will provide a much-needed boost to our struggling housing market and our broader economy by helping to soak up the excess housing inventory that we see in so many parts of our country. Estimates show that there may be up to 3 million renters who are currently financially well qualified to buy a median-priced home. Timely help to bolster the housing market is essential.

Another important component is the expanded net operating loss provision, which will provide an immediate cash infusion to struggling businesses, large and small, all across the Nation. By giving businesses that are currently in loss positions the opportunity to claim refunds on taxes they paid when they were profitable, we can help employers make crucial new investments in our economy and, most importantly, free up additional payroll to help get more Americans back to work. That's the goal that all of us on both sides of the aisle should share. And I'm pleased to support the 5-year net operating loss carryback included in this legislation.

But this is not the end of the process. There is much more work to be done. Before the end of the year, the House is expected to consider legislation to extend the current Federal extended unemployment benefit program possibly through all of next year. This would cost $80 billion or more and simply add to the enormous deficits and equally enormous State tax hikes on jobs this system is amassing.

All of this begs the question: Where are the jobs? While long-term unemployed workers appreciate the additional help, what they really want is a good job. Yet for all the massive spending and debt we've incurred this year in the name of stimulating the economy, job creation is one thing this administration and congressional Democrats have failed to deliver. Unfortunately, that's why we are here today. These policies and stimulus have failed.

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

I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder).

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton).

I reserve the balance of my time.

I understand Chairman McDermott has additional speakers, so I will reserve the balance of my time.

I continue to reserve my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 2 minutes.

While there are serious disagreements about what direction to go on the economy, there is bipartisan support for the provisions to help people try to buy that first home or to move up into that next one, and there is bipartisan support across the aisle strongly in this Congress to help small businesses survive this recession, not just small businesses but medium-sized businesses and larger businesses. The truth of the matter is, a job is a job. And if we can help companies weather this storm, if we can help them keep workers on the payroll, if we can help them sort of balance out their tax payments over these years, allow them to be in a position to recover and grow when this economy finally does grow, I think that that tax relief, targeted to those who can most create jobs, is extremely helpful.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton).

Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.

I reserve my time.

I reserve my time.

I yield myself such time as I may consume.

There is bipartisan support for much of this bill. For all the good this bill will do to help people buy their first home, and perhaps move up, for all the help it will provide to help businesses survive this recession, make no mistake: the unemployment benefits are no substitute for a good job, and in that regard, this Congress and this White House has failed the American public.

We were told that the stimulus bill, all $787 billion of it, $1 trillion with interest, as Christina Romer said, the head of the President's economic advisers, would provide an immediate jolt to the economy. They promised us that it would keep the unemployment rate under 8 percent. They promised it would create jobs in every State in the Nation.

Today, the unemployment rate is not 8 percent. It is 9.8 percent and rising, for the numbers we will hear tomorrow, to 9.9 percent in all likelihood. Forty-nine of 50 States have lost jobs.

The two areas of manufacturing and construction, where we were promised the greatest rate of job creation, have actually seen the greatest rate of job loss. In fact, nearly 3 million jobs have been lost since the stimulus took effect.

We are not simply in, as the White House would say, a jobless recovery. We are in a ``job loss'' recovery. We continue to shed hundreds of thousands of workers every month, 175,000 in the past month; and unfortunately, the stimulus has lost all credibility as to job creation.

We hear each day reports of wildly exaggerated jobs claims. The Associated Press did a revealing story that shows that in some cases contractors exaggerated their job numbers by 10 times. In other cases they counted the same job four times. In many cases the money didn't come from the stimulus at all.

This morning, a Dallas Morning News investigation showed that in Texas, one out of every four jobs related to education was a part-time summer job. In one community, an organization claimed 450 jobs were created with stimulus money of $26,000. In one case, again, the money didn't even come from stimulus money. And in Beaumont, they are paying for child care for people out of stimulus dollars.

Unfortunately, the claim that the stimulus has created millions of new jobs, created or saved them, simply isn't backed up. And, in fact, the majority of economists today say it has had little impact on the stimulus, and a second stimulus down the road isn't needed or, in fact, will be damaging.

I think what is critical, too, is a lot of businesses are holding off creating those new jobs, especially small businesses, because of Washington. They watch what we are doing and considering on health care. It will drive up their premiums. Cap-and-trade will drive up their energy costs. New energy taxes will offshore American energy jobs. They look at new financial regulations, tax increases on everything from income to capital to dividends to international investment, and they are saying we are not going to create jobs. They are not going to risk jobs in this environment.

It is hard enough to predict the market itself, much less to predict the market and Congress together. And when they look at the bill that this Congress will vote on this weekend on health care, they see tax increases on small businesses that will cost us about 4 million jobs, mandates on small businesses that will force their workers out of their own health care system, and a job trap that actually punishes small businesses. When they hire between 11 and 25 workers, actually in this bill Congress punishes them, and punishes them more if they raise the wages of those workers.

So, there is a lot more that needs to be done on the economy. This bill is no substitute for a good job. It is a step forward in housing and for business retention. For that, there is bipartisan support, and I do appreciate Chairman McDermott's work on trying to bring a bill forward to this floor that many can support.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 2996-- Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010.

Requesting Member: Congressman Kevin Brady, Texas 8th Congressional District

Bill Number: H.R. 2996--Interior, Environment and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010

Project: Big Thicket National Preserve

Account: National Park Service, Land Acquisition

Requesting Entity: The Conservation Fund, Texas Office

Address of Requesting Entity: 101 W 6th Street, Suite 601, Austin, TX

The Big Thicket National Preserve is one of America's ecological treasures. It is an unusually shaped preserve whose boundaries include land once owned by major timber companies. This funding represents the final year in a seven year land acquisition program. This request enables the National Park Service to acquire critical land within the congressionally authorized boundary of the Big Thicket National Preserve to diversify the economic potential of southeast Texas through increased tourism opportunities. This project works only with voluntary, ``willing-seller'' landowners.

The $5,000,000 for this project included in this final conference report combined with previous funding will allow the National Park Service to purchase over 2500 acres of land on 23 tracts acquired from willing sellers or by voluntary donation.

Madam Speaker, now we know. Speaker Pelosi has released her final health care bill and scheduled a vote within a week. The Pelosi plan is a 2,000-page, $1 trillion, unapologetic, full- throated government takeover of America's health care system.

I am devoting every waking hour to stopping this bill, which will interject government into the most intimate health care decisions, drive up costs in the deficit, force millions of people into a government-run plan, raise taxes on professionals and small businesses, open the door to taxpayer-funded abortions, provide care for illegal immigrants, and exempt Members of Congress.

I call on every American who cares about our Nation to engage now in every district and every community in every way. These moments come but once in a lifetime. For our children and their future, the time for freedom, the time for action is now.

Well, thank you, Mr. Dreier. Thank you for your leadership on trade for so many years in Congress.

Thank you, Mr. Herger, a former top Republican on the Trade Subcommittee of the House Ways and Means.

We are here because we want jobs in America, good-paying jobs, the types you can raise your family on, and today is a good day to be talking about it because two things occurred today.

One, Speaker Nancy Pelosi introduced the Pelosi plan--the new national takeover of America's health care system, which we are going to spend every waking hour defeating, sending back to the drawing board, and getting a health care reform bill that's done right.

The third quarter economic numbers came out, which show how America has done over the last 3 months. It showed that it grew about 3\1/2\ percent. Growth is good, but if you look at it, what you realize is almost all of that growth are onetime events--Cash for Clunkers, which is over, and businesses have drawn down their stockpiles of inventory. That only happens one time.

Looking forward, whether we have hit the bottom or not, the question is: Is the private sector, the private market in America, going to drive our growth in the future or is government? The only way you have a strong recovery is if it's the private marketplace.

What we are missing are jobs created by selling American products and services around the world. It's no longer enough to just buy American. We have to sell American because of what you said--so many consumers live outside our borders. We want them to buy our ag products, our services, our computers, our equipment, all of that, but when we go outside the country, what we often find is that the rules are tilted against our companies and our workers.

Other countries, China, Europe, Latin America, have reached trade agreements that give their companies and their workers an advantage over ours. Today, what is interesting, as you both have said, is that when we have trade agreements, we win. We sell our American products and services. We have a trade surplus with our trade agreement partners.

In Latin America--I was just thinking about it--in Chile people said we would sell about 50 percent more products there. We have sold 250 percent more American products.

You are right, Mr. Dreier. Those agreements simply level the playing field. They say if your country sells into the United States, we get an opportunity to sell our products into your country, and we have fair rules to do it. And when we compete, our companies, our workers win. They do it in ag, they do it in manufacturing, in technology, in services, in all types of goods.

But, as Mr. Herger said, and you earlier, America is falling behind. This new government has taken itself voluntarily off the playing field. They have said we are not going to engage in trade right now. And while we have benched ourselves, the rest of the world is still playing this game. They are cutting agreements that favor China, Europe, Latin America, Brazil and other countries, Korea, the Asian-Pacific area. They are cutting agreements and deals to give their companies advantages far greater over ours. As a result, that doesn't just cost us sales of our products, it costs us jobs, because we are so good as a country when we compete.

Thank you for raising this issue because I think it is shameful that America has not ratified the trade agreement with Colombia. Yeah, there are strong jobs reasons. Colombia is able to sell their products in the United States almost duty free. We want the opportunity to compete with their customers. Canada, Europe are cutting agreements with them that will cost us about half a billion dollars of sales of U.S. goods and services and products which, again, those are lost jobs.

The point you made early on, Mr. Dreier, is that beyond that, here's a country that has brought itself, with America's help, from darkness to light. President Uribe has taken the country, established the rule of law, freedom of democracy, freedom of the press, freedom in the marketplace, has a judiciary that is working. They have lowered the violence rate in a neighborhood, in a region that absolutely rejects America and all we stand for, including this new President, rejecting him as well.

Here's America's allies who are fighting with us to stop drug trafficking, stands with us on security issues and human rights, have done remarkable things, and we've turned our backs on them.

So whether it is Colombia and that strong national security reason, Panama and the market that goes with that, Korea, and the rest of the world, where, again, as you have said, America is falling behind, it is just a shame.

I was just thinking about people who are out of work. We have lost 9 million people who no longer have jobs since the recession began--almost 3 million since they passed that huge stimulus bill--who may be watching tonight, to have no jobs, maybe have lost hope of getting them. Yet the companies that could hire them are manufacturing products or offering services or growing agricultural goods they don't have an opportunity to sell throughout the world. That the rest of these countries are just moving past us so aggressively selling, promoting their country's goods and services. And America is so arrogant that we don't even go out there to try to create a level playing field.

I always tell people, in closing for myself, that if you drive down a highway, every third acre you see planted is for sale around the world. If you go to a computer company, every fourth worker is building something for sales around the world. If you go to a manufacturing plant, every fifth worker is building something for sale around the world. If you look at our whole economy, four out of every ten workers are tied to trade.

So if we can sell American, not just buy American--sell American--we can create jobs for Americans. We can put people back to work. We can improve our own economy. So what are we waiting for?

I yield back.

Let me just say this, because I have enjoyed this discussion. It's about jobs, it's about America falling behind.

There is this principle in trade we should not forget. The principle is if you and I build a better mousetrap, we should have the freedom to sell it throughout the world without government interference. If someone else builds a better mousetrap we should have the freedom to buy it for our family and for our business.

That freedom to buy, sell and compete is critical because you forget, other countries, because others compete to sell to you and I. We have a wide choice of automobiles and clothing and electronics and all. They say, by studies, that we save so much money because of that trade, that competition, that most families in America can go to a grocery store once a month for free because of the benefits of free trade here in America, which is even more puzzling on raising our standard of living why we allow ourselves to fall behind and why we are giving up on those jobs, why America isn't leading.

That is a question I believe only our President can answer.

I thank my friend from east Texas, where our districts border each other and whom I have gotten to know and respect here in Congress. And I thank you for this leadership.

The timing is now. The bill has been introduced. The fight is on. And rarely in our lives do we have the opportunity to make such a difference on a bill that can take us down such a wrong road for America.

I will be brief, but what comes to mind is recently a national pollster whom you would know and recognize did a survey of Americans, and he asked them two questions, and he said, which one is most true: The first question is America is going to spend $1 trillion of your tax dollars to reform health care and it won't add a dime to the deficit. The second statement was there is human life on other planets. By a three-to-one margin, people chose human life on other planets as more true than we can spend all this money and not add a dime to the deficit.

The American public is smart. I held more than 50 town hall meetings during August and September, roundtables, all types of forums, and the truth of the matter is this Speaker and this House didn't listen to any of them.

This bill, Mr. Gohmert, you talk about and show today, 2,000 pages, $1 trillion, 31 new Federal agencies, mandates and commissions that come between you and your doctor, who ultimately decide what doctors you can see, what treatments the government thinks you deserve, what medicines they think you can get.

This bill today, the fight we are engaged in, government will inject itself in our most intimate health care decisions. It raises the costs of health care. It increases the deficit for generations

to come. It raises taxes on professionals and small businesses. It will force millions of people out of the private plan that they choose to take. It cuts Medicare for seniors. It will ration care in the future. It opens the door to taxpayer-funded abortions and taxpayer care for illegal immigrants. And it exempts Members of Congress from this government-run plan.

This is a bill that is wrong for America. We all, everyone tonight, every Republican, support health care reform. Many of us have worked years, all of us on this floor have worked years for this day. But we can do better than this.

And we've submitted now, what, Mr. Gohmert, over 40 Republican health care bills; five of them, comprehensive reform. We haven't gotten an opportunity to offer any of them. They haven't spent an hour listening to any of them. And as our leaders in Texas Medical Center have told me, it is so important we get this right. Health care is so complex. Take it step by step. Focus on affordability. Move to coverage for small businesses and people with preexisting illnesses. Pass lawsuit reform to end defensive medicine. Find innovative ways to squeeze the overhead out of health care. Make it more efficient. There are all these great ideas. They will never be heard in the rush to this national health care system.

Now is the time to act. That's why tonight your discussion with the American public, even though there is a World Series Game going on, in truth, at the end of that 9 innings, that game is over. But at the end of this bill, everyone's life in America, our children and grandchildren, will be touched and I think harmed by this bill.

I appreciate your leadership. I'm going to spend every waking hour until this vote is held to kill this bill, to kill this bill and send it back to the drawing board and come back with reform that all of America can embrace.

Mr. Gohmert, thank you, my friend from east Texas, for leading this discussion tonight.

Mr. Speaker, over the past few months, we have held over 50 town hall meetings and forums on health care reform in our district. Recently, we held one in The Woodlands with a panel of doctors to talk about health care. One of them was Dr. Peter Shedden, a Canadian-born neurosurgeon, who practices in The Woodlands. He was trained in Canada, is very complimentary about the way they trained physicians. He shared his experiences.

He told us how his father died after he was refused kidney dialysis, even as the disease entered the acute phase, because he was over 70 years old. He told us, ``You've got to know somebody'' to get to the front of the line. He said, ``There are no second opinions in the Canadian system . . . After age 70, if you get sick, you're done.''

Because of the long waiting lists, he told us ER doctors are forced to make a quick evaluation of whether or not someone is ``salvageable'' when they come in the door. He said, ``Within 48 hours, you'd better show you are going to improve; otherwise, your breathing tube is taken out and you move on . . . because there is nowhere for you to go.'' He also said many patients come from Canada to Texas to seek his treatment.

So before we go to a national, government-run system, I have one question for those proponents of that bill: When was the last time you went to Canada for your health care?

Madam Speaker, I rise today to offer a tribute to Mr. Christopher Frenze, Republican House Staff Director for the Joint Economic Committee, who is retiring this week from a distinguished career in government service. Chris has been a longtime public servant of this Committee and a tremendous asset to both my office and this Congressional body.

After earning his B.A. from American University and doing graduate work in economics at Virginia Tech, Chris served as Director of Research at the National Tax Equality Association. Chris began a long and extraordinary career at the Joint Economic Committee in 1981, holding such positions as Senior Economist, Chief Economist to the Vice Chairman, Executive Director and Republican Staff Director.

Over the years, Chris focused the Committee's research and policy work on several key fields of economics, such as tax policy, fiscal policy, and business cycle analysis, including the assessment of labor market conditions. This research aided countless Members considering tax policy changes, monetary policy targets, IMF reform, and numerous other issues. His career has been distinguished by his relentless effort to promote the public interest, encourage economic growth, reduce the burden of government and respect the Constitution.

Chris's knowledge of economic policy is only one of his many talents. He is recognized as an effective, successful manager who recruited valuable economists that served the Committee for many years. His work serving Senate and House Republicans Members of the Committee, in both the majority and in the minority, has given him unique insights into the way the Committee and the Congress functions, and his expertise, vast institutional knowledge and constant professionalism will be sorely missed.

Chris Frenze represents the very best in public service. I know I can speak for all of my colleagues on the Joint Economic Committee, and those Members that have served on it in the past, in congratulating Chris upon his retirement and thanking him for his dedicated and tireless service to the United States Congress.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in tribute to Mr. Christopher Frenze, Republican House staff director for the Joint Economic Committee, who's retiring this week from a distinguished career in government service.

Chris joined the Joint Economic Committee in 1981. His career has been distinguished by his relentless effort to promote the public interest, encourage economic growth, reduce the burden of government, and respect the Constitution. His knowledge of economic policy is only one of his many talents.

He's an effective, successful manager who recruited top economists to serve the committee for many years. His work has served both Senate and House Republican Members in the majority and in the minority. He represents the very best in public service.

I know I speak for all of my colleagues in the Joint Economic Committee in congratulating Chris upon his retirement and thanking him in his dedicated and tireless service to the United States Congress.