Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to join the chorus of Americans asking Washington to stop damaging the economy with job- killing regulations. Small businesses don't thrive when they're hit with additional burdens from the Federal Government.

As unbelievable as it sounds, some in this body actually believe that new regulations create jobs because they force businesses to hire people to comply with the new mandates. Madam

Speaker, this defies common sense. And that's why I am introducing two bills: one which would pause all new regulations for a year so that businesses would know the rules they are to live under, and another that would require Federal regulators to analyze the impact of their new rules on jobs and to find the least costly alternative for each new business mandate.

Madam Speaker, let's come together and agree that regulations don't create jobs. And let's pass commonsense legislation to get America working again.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize William Vander Ark of Leawood, Kansas. William was diagnosed with Type 1 diabetes when he was 8 years old. William must act as a mathematician, a physician, a personal trainer and a dietician just to stay alive. His insulin pump functions as his lifeline.

This summer William joined 150 children and teens who participated in the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Children's Congress in Washington, DC. Collectively, they are fighting for a cure and working to help raise research money for this chronic, debilitating disease that affects nearly 26 million Americans nationwide.

William is entering high school in the fall and wants a cure for Type 1 diabetes so the disease doesn't change the course of his future. His dream is to become a commercial pilot, but current rules prevent those who have Type 1 diabetes from getting a license. While the law is in place because of safety concerns, there have been large strides in the development of new, transformational technologies since its passage. Despite adversity, William is committed to his dream and knows that if he keeps his mind to it and works hard, he can someday change the rules.

One of these new technologies is the development of an artificial pancreas that is at a critical point in the regulatory process. I, along with numerous other Members of Congress, have written to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and expressed a strong interest in

a timely approval of this life-changing advancement. This technology could dramatically improve the health and quality of life for those, like William, who are living with diabetes.

People with diabetes need better tools to manage their disease and prevent its life threatening and costly complications. We need to move forward in the development of this technology by quickly providing clear and reasonable guidance so this can proceed as soon as possible.

William's passion and zeal have inspired not only me, but have left an impression on my entire staff. His parents should be extremely proud of him and his unwillingness to let a his life be dictated by his disease.

Today I rise in defense of small business owners across the country who are attempting to survive under a mountain of taxes, rules, and regulations coming out of Washington, D.C.

Seven out of ten new jobs in this country are created by small business owners. To get our economy back on track, we know it's these innovators and entrepreneurs who have to start growing and creating jobs.

Entrepreneurship is at a 17-year low. In the last few years, there has been a 23 percent drop in new business creation, falling to the lowest level since 1994.

Instead of debating ways to raise taxes and further burden these job creators, we should spend our time trying to eliminate the job-killing policies coming out of this administration.

Mr. Speaker, it's time that we support the free enterprise system. It's time that we get our fiscal house in order. And it's time that we get America back to work again.

Madam Speaker, we all know that the Federal Government is spending too much money, that our national debt is too large and that we must make serious reductions to get our budget under control.

As our Nation's leaders continue today to debate the national debt, some in the Washington establishment are calling for greater Federal revenue by asking more Americans to sacrifice by sending more of their hard-earned money to the Federal Government in the name of higher taxes. Yet we all know that greater taxes on small business owners and families will not help the economy grow and will not put Americans back to work.

Tax, borrow, and spend policies do not create jobs. We cannot tax our way out of this debt. At a time when we continue to see record unemployment, taking more money from our job creators to pay for Washington's spending disease cannot be an option.

What we need, Madam Speaker, is a growing economy to bring in new revenue. By pursuing policies that reduce spending, keep taxes low and reduce regulatory burdens, we can help revive the economy and stabilize our Federal budgets.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today with grave concern over our country's economy and fiscal condition. For too long, Washington has borrowed money to finance government, and today our Nation's leaders continue to meet to discuss this looming crisis. We all know that this crisis is spending driven. It's not that government taxes too little; it's that government spends too much.

Mr. Speaker, the American people know that the policies of tax, borrow, and spend will not lead us to prosperity as a Nation. Taking more money from hardworking Americans and sending it to Washington is not the answer. Rather, it's time for Washington to roll up its sleeves, get to work, and live within its means, just like families and small businesses have to do all across this country. It's time to enact significant spending cuts, put in place caps on future spending, and pass a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution.

Mr. Speaker, if we are to rebuild our Nation's economy and put Americans back to work together, we must put our own fiscal house in order first.

Today, I rise for a very special tribute to a strong, wonderful, and sweet woman who has played a remarkable role in my life and all those who know her. Edna Yoder, my grandmother, will be celebrating her centennial birthday next week on June 28. Edna reflects the heart and soul of our American rural heritage, and she embodies the prairie spirit that is the bedrock of our Nation's values.

Born in 1911 and raised on a Kansas farm, she and my grandfather, like so many other Americans, carved a way of life out of the Kansas prairie through hard work, determination, and strong heartland values. Each time I step on the floor of the United States House, I strive to honor these principles that my grandmother and her generation have taught us.

Mr. Speaker, join me in wishing my grandmother Edna Yoder a happy 100th birthday.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to discuss yet another negative impact the Dodd-Frank Act is having on the U.S. economy and job growth.

As agencies here in the United States are scrambling to meet the unrealistic deadlines proposed by this act, and as community banks struggle under a mountain of new regulations that strangle our economic recovery, we have also done great damage to the competitiveness of the United States in the international financial marketplace.

Other nations have yet to even consider the stringent regulations similar to the ones proposed in Dodd-Frank. Most important are the new proposed regulations that will require over-the-counter derivatives to be traded and cleared on exchanges.

G-20 nations have stated a goal for the end of 2012 as the implementation date of any global derivative reforms. Our earlier upcoming deadline of July 16, 2011, for U.S. implementation of the derivatives reforms, puts the U.S. financial market at a significant global disadvantage and will further disrupt our economic recovery and job growth.

Let's repeal these damaging economic provisions and let's get America back to work again.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to a former Congressman from Kansas's Third Congressional District who recently passed. Robert F. Ellsworth served Kansas in the United States Congress for three terms during the 1960s. He was a proud Jayhawk, graduating from the University of Kansas, and he served our country admirably in both World War II and the Korean War as an officer in the United States Navy.

He was known as a candid and independent-minded legislator during his tenure in Congress. A personal adviser to President Richard Nixon and a confidant of Kansas Senator Bob Dole, he also served as an ambassador to NATO and as the Deputy Secretary of Defense under President Gerald Ford. After leaving politics, he founded Hamilton BioVentures, a company focusing on investment in emerging life science technologies.

He is survived by his wife, Eleanor; children William and Anne; as well as stepchildren John, Sarah, and William. My heart, and the heart of the Third District, is with him and his family during this difficult time.

I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding me this time.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule that we are debating here today so that we can debate a bill on homeland security. Now, that might come as a surprise to many who are watching this debate, or to the Speaker or anyone else in this Chamber today, that we are actually debating a rule that deals with homeland security.

Now, the fantasy discussion going on on the left right now on any topic that comes to mind might be entertaining to some, but for the rest of this country, they would love to see this body actually debate issues that are on topic, and that issue is homeland security. Agencies like Border Patrol, ICE agents, Coast Guard personnel, the Secret Service, funding for all sorts of agencies, $1 billion for FEMA disaster relief fund, are these not issues important enough to discuss on the floor today?

The bill prohibits the use of funds to move detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, into the United States and denies them immigration benefits such as visas, admission into the United States, and classification as refugees, all sorts of things that are critical to homeland security, to protecting Americans from terrorism, keeping Americans safe.

And we are doing it under an open rule, and that is the issue on this rule debate. For the first time in 4 years, we are debating an appropriations bill that affects hundreds of millions of Americans related to homeland security, and we are allowing every side to bring amendments down to the floor and to discuss those issues.

This is a critical moment. No matter how many times the folks on the left want to come forward and obfuscate or change the subject, that's fine, we can have those debates. And we will continue to have those debates. But we are

debating today a rule that will allow this body, in an open fashion for the first time in anyone's memory, to debate an open rule on homeland security. If you have an amendment that is germane to the bill, bring it. If it is found worthy, it will pass. This is the process that we used in committee, and it worked. We produced a good piece of legislation that will provide for the security of the homeland.

We have an opportunity today to seriously debate the topic that is before us on homeland security. No matter how many times the left attempts to change the subject from what we are talking about, we know that the homeland security of our country, protecting us from terrorism, is a critical issue and we will debate it, no matter how many times the left tries to stop us.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to express the great concern that many of us have over the potential impact a government shutdown will have on our men and women serving overseas. Recent Department of Defense memos have stated that in the event of a shutdown, our troops will be required to continue to serve our country, but they and their families will receive no compensation.

Madam Speaker, the House has passed H.R. 1, which would protect these military families from being left in the cold and would keep the government operating while making reductions in spending. As we wait for action on that legislation from the Senate, our troops and their families hang in the balance.

We cannot allow this Washington process to threaten the operational readiness of our military and dishonor the service of our soldiers. Our men and women in uniform are bravely putting themselves in harm's way in service to our country. We cannot let them down. We owe this to our troops.

Mr. Speaker, as a 5th generation Kansan and proud alum, I would like to offer ecstatic congratulations to the University of Kansas Jayhawks.

This weekend, the KU men's basketball team charged their way to a 2nd consecutive Big 12 Tournament Championship and clinched their 7th straight regular season Big 12 title. As Coach Larry Brown said of Kansas: ``There's no better place to coach, there's no better place to go to school, there's no better place to play.''

Thanks Jayhawks for again proving those words true. As the proud and mighty Jayhawk Nation gets ready for the big dance, I would like to wish Coach Bill Self and his team the best of luck in the tournament. ROCK CHALK JAYHAWK! Go KU!

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I rise today in strong support of H.R. 830. The bill would repeal a well-intentioned but bankrupt policy.

Mr. Chairman, the American people are tired of bailout after bailout and big spending bill after big spending bill. With $14 trillion in debt and borrowing $5 billion a day, yet unemployment is at 9 percent, the American people are sending us an unmistakable message: The idea of borrowing, bailing out and spending isn't working.

We're borrowing more money in Washington with this program that we don't have to help Americans borrow more money at home that they can't afford for housing they can't afford. Mr. Chairman, this is madness. When will this stop and when will the politicians in Washington understand that we're not going to be able to borrow and spend our way to prosperity? The American people are tired of this. They want Washington leaders to step up, reduce spending, and eliminate programs that aren't working.

Mr. Chairman, I ask today that we pass this legislation and restore fiscal sanity to Washington.

Madam Speaker, we can debate today who is at fault for the crisis we are in; but I think we have an agreement, which is, with record spending, deficits and accumulated debt, coupled with 20 months straight of 9 percent unemployment, it is time for us to get serious about the crushing effect of a runaway debt on this economy.

As Speaker Boehner said, ``Just like a bankrupt business can't create jobs, a bankrupt country can't create jobs.''

Small business owners, individuals and families now find themselves at the mercy of this debt that we as a government have recklessly accumulated. It's not Democrats or Republicans. It's those families and individuals and business owners who are the real casualties of this government spending spree. So now we must choose a pathway. We are at a crossroads: reasonable spending reductions and keeping the government open or heading towards devastating tax increases and crushing deficits.

The tax increases that would be needed to actually alleviate these bloated deficits would wipe out individuals, families and businesses. According to the CRS, current income tax rates would need to double across the board to close the expected deficits of this administration. You can't create jobs under these devastating taxes. We must reduce spending.

We have a choice as the American people. We can choose prosperity; we can choose lower taxes; and we can choose reduced debt. Or we can go other the other direction and choose record-breaking deficits, historic taxes and devastation all across this country.

Madam Speaker, we have a choice to make today, and it is my hope the Members of this body will choose to keep the government open, will choose to begin making modest reductions, and will pass this necessary resolution to begin the pathway towards prosperity again in this country.

I rise today in strong opposition to the Bishop amendment.

Madam Chair, reports indicate that the most imminent, critical threat to our Nation's homeland security is a biological attack that could result in a serious food crisis brought on by disease spread by terrorists hoping to infect cattle and other livestock in the agriculture production in this country. Simply put, the results could be devastating.

The National Bio and Agro Defense facility, a safe, secure agricultural and bio-containment lab, is the proper facility to research and protect American agriculture from the threats that exist, both foreign and abroad, from agriculture bioterrorism.

I ask my colleagues today to join me in an effort to oppose the Bishop amendment, which would turn back the clock in our efforts to combat biological terrorism and which would save

the country no money in the name of stopping this very worthy project.

The facts on NBAF are clear.

The Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission's report, The Clock Is Ticking, indicates that the most imminent threat to our Nation's homeland security is a biological attack.

The same Commission gives our Nation a failing grade in our ability to recognize, respond to and recover from a biological attack.

Current and previous Administrations have affirmed these threats and the need to prepare and respond.

Currently, the Plum Island Animal Disease Center is where much of the Biosafety Level-3 Agricultural research is performed. However, this facility was built in the 1950s, is nearing the end of its lifecycle, and does not contain the necessary biosafety level facilities to meet the NBAF research requirements.

A rigorous, three-year site selection process for the NBAF was conducted by civil servants and independent experts in the Departments of Homeland Security and Agriculture.

Nearly 30 potential locations were reviewed all around the country, including Plum Island. After thorough risk, environmental, and security assessments were completed, Manhattan, Kansas was unanimously selected as the best place on the merits to carry out the NBAF's essential research mission.

NBAF in Manhattan, Kansas will be a state-of-the-art biocontainment facility for the study of foreign animal, emerging and zoonotic (transmitted from animals to humans) diseases that threaten the U.S. animal agriculture and public health.

The selection process was affirmed by the DHS Inspector General, was conducted in accordance with Federal regulations and was fair.

The funding for the NBAF was included in the budget and was not an earmark. The funding will be matched by more than $150 million from the State of Kansas and will also be offset by the sale of the antiquated Plum Island facility. The State of Kansas has already spent $18 million to prepare for the NBAF site.

It is crucial that we do not turn this discussion on the spending reductions our government must take into a debate between states. Funding of NBAF is not a local issue, it is a national issue rooted in our national security.

I appreciate the congressman from Missouri's indulgence for a little time here.

I've been watching this conversation you've been having on the floor, the gentleman has, along with the gentleman, and it seems like we're in the middle of an ideological battle in this country. On the one hand, you have folks on the left that argue that government is the solution to all the problems our country is facing. Unemployment, their argument is that we need to create more government jobs, that Washington can solve these problems.

And out in Kansas we know that it is the private sector. It's the individual that creates jobs in this country. We know that it's hard work and determination. And you can't substitute that with government bureaucrats or government mandates. You can't mandate or regulate someone into prosperity. It just doesn't happen. And that's a real battle that's happening in this country right now, and I think this is a challenge that we've really got to face in this Congress

On the one hand we have more entitlement spending, greater deficits, higher taxes. And the other hand you've got free enterprise, economic freedom, prosperity. And to me, that's the real essence of this challenge: Are we going to create a free enterprise country or are we going to be an entitlement society?

I think what the gentleman is speaking about is the American dream. It's the American free enterprise system. It's the essence of what makes America what it is. And to watch and to see it under threat here in Washington, it angers and it frustrates Americans.

And that's what we saw this last year, Americans coming out to town hall meetings and expressing themselves. They don't feel like their voices are being heard on the floor of the United States House of Representatives. They want people to stand up and to explain that greater spending and greater deficits, that's not the road to prosperity.

The road to prosperity is built brick by brick by hardworking Americans out in Kansas and out in Ohio and out in Missouri and all across this country as they work to put a little of their own money in and build a business or to take care of their family. They work hard. Sweat equity. That's what built this country.

And when they see the folks in Washington believe that that money isn't the people's money, it's Washington's money--and in fact, the folks in Washington, they don't even spend the money they're given; they spend as much as they want, regardless of how much money we have.

So part of this job situation, this American prosperity situation, it comes back to spending. And what we do here on the floor of the United States House of Representatives and how we advocate and stand up for those people that sometimes aren't always heard, that's what we have to do here.

I thank the gentleman.

And I think what the Congressman from Missouri is discussing, these specific points of how we could reduce spending and how we could bring the Federal budget back towards a balanced budget, which is what Americans want us to do, we've all seen across this country, Americans have, what happens in Washington. They spend as much as they want, regardless of how much money they have, and that has to stop.

This is an opportunity this year, with a new Congress and new energy and new enthusiasm on behalf of the American people, it's a chance to stand up and say, We're tired of the overspending. We're tired of trillions of dollars being spent on programs for which some of which we can't find real tangible results. We're tired of duplication of programs. We're tired of endless bureaucracy and red tape.

Americans want to see action and they want to see bold proposals, such as what you are outlining there, to show that we can actually, truly cut spending. We have heard folks on this floor say we can't cut spending, that it will hurt too much. Well, what hurts is this $14 trillion debt, this legacy we are leaving to our children and our grandchildren. This is an immoral legacy that we're passing along to the next generation.

And I think what the gentleman from Ohio is standing up for, and the gentleman from Missouri, is that this is the time to say enough is enough. It's time to stand up and to start cutting spending and reining in this out-of-control government.