Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, unemployment under President Obama is at a 26 year high. The last time unemployment was this high was when President Reagan took office.

Despite the similar unemployment figures during the Obama and Reagan Administrations, the media have treated President Obama far more favorably than they treated President Reagan, according to an analysis by the Business and Media Institute. BMI found that 91 percent of the stories mentioning the Reagan Administration and unemployment were negative, while only 7 percent of the Obama administration stories were negative. That is absolutely astounding. Furthermore, the networks connected the Reagan White House to negative job numbers almost twice as often as they have the Obama administration.

Why is the media giving President Obama a free pass? The media should report the facts, not play favorites.

Madam Speaker, the New York Times reported recently that President Obama has ``considerable political strength.''

The Times based this statement on its own poll, which found the President has an approval rating of 56 percent--the highest number of any recent poll.

One reason for this might be that the Times weighted the poll in favor of Democrats.

Among those who actually responded to the poll, there were more Democrats than Republicans by 6 percentage points.

But when the Times finished computing the results, they had increased the gap to and unreasonable and inexplicable 15 percentage points.

With so many more Democrats in the sample, it should come as no surprise that the President's approval rating is a higher than other polls have found.

The Times would do well to show more balance in their polling--and their reporting.

Madam Speaker, one of America's top concerns during this difficult economic time has been the frequency of home mortgage foreclosures.

Earlier this month, there was news to encourage us. Efforts by banks, borrowers and the Administration to modify troubled mortgages have begun to produce much larger numbers of modifications.

As banks have stabilized their balance sheets and raised fresh capital, their officers even have been able to reduce borrowers' mortgage principal when they work out loans. Modifications that reduce the balances that borrowers owe on their homes have more than tripled.

Earlier this year, Congress debated legislation to change the Bankruptcy Code and force principal reductions on the market. The measure was rightly defeated. To send homeowners into bankruptcy is not the answer and forced principal reductions will chill future lending.

Recently, calls for bankruptcy legislation reemerged in the House. This month's news shows once more that the measure is not needed. The market has found a better solution.

Americans need Congress to do something else to help homeowners. Let's pass effective legislation to bring growth and jobs back to America. That is the better way to help people keep their homes.

Mr. Speaker, today, this afternoon, several of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle intend to unveil their outline of a plan to give amnesty to millions of illegal immigrants. I don't expect it to hold many surprises. It is more likely to lay out the same proposal for amnesty that President Obama and the Democrats have promised all along to the illegal immigrant lobby.

They should know that the bill doesn't have a prayer because the American people oppose rewarding lawbreakers, which then encourages more illegal immigration. Allowing millions of illegal immigrants to stay and take jobs away from citizens is like giving a burglar a key to the house.

Illegal immigrants should play by the rules, return home and wait their turn just like millions of legal immigrants do.

Mr. Speaker, here are some facts about the Democrats' health care bills: They reduce benefits for seniors, according to the Congressional Budget Office; young people, and perhaps most others, pay higher premiums for health insurance, according to nonpartisan analysts; just because you like your health care insurance does not mean you can keep it, according to the Congressional Budget Office; if you don't buy the insurance policy the government requires, you pay an excise tax of almost $2,000, according to legislative language; and the cost of health care increases--not decreases-- according to the Congressional Budget Office. And none of the plans contains language, known as ``tort reform,'' to reduce frivolous lawsuits against medical personnel.

Mr. Speaker, let's give the American people the facts about the Democrats' health care proposals. If we do, they will insist that we start over and get it right.

Madam Speaker, one of America's top concerns during this difficult economic time has been the frequency of home mortgage foreclosures.

Last week, there was news to encourage us. Efforts by banks, borrowers and the Administration to modify troubled mortgages have begun to produce much larger numbers of modifications.

As banks have stabilized their balance sheets and raised fresh capital, their officers even have been able to reduce borrowers' mortgage principal when they work out loans. Modifications that reduce the balances that borrowers owe on their homes have more than tripled.

Earlier this year, Congress debated legislation to change the Bankruptcy Code and force principal reductions on the market. The measure was rightly defeated. To send homeowners into bankruptcy is not the answer and forced principal reductions will chill future lending.

Recently, calls for bankruptcy legislation reemerged in the House. Last week's news shows once more that the measure is not needed. The market has found a better solution.

Americans need Congress to do something else to help homeowners. Let's pass effective legislation to bring growth and jobs back to America. That is the better way to help people keep their homes.

Madam Speaker, a new Pew survey has found that one-third of Mexican nationals would move to America, and more than half of them would come illegally, if they could.

But when the New York Times reported on the study, the paper injected it with one of the most common forms of bias: they treat illegal status as a circumstance that just ``materialized'' for illegal immigrants.

Instead of reporting that half of these individuals would come to the U.S. illegally, the Times said: ``more than half . . . would move even if they did not have legal immigration documents.''

Apparently, the Times just can't bring themselves to use the word ``illegal.'' In that case, why not downplay all illegal activity? The Times could refer to burglars as ``building inspectors,'' for example.

The fact is that those who broke U.S. laws aren't just ``without documents;'' they are not entitled to documents. Downplaying that fact won't change it. And, even if the news media try to hide the truth, the American people know that illegal immigrants have broken the law.

Madam Speaker, by overwhelming margins, Americans say they do not trust the national media and that the media are too liberal, according to a new Gallup poll. Gallup found that just 1 in 10 Americans have a ``great deal of confidence in the media to report the news fully, accurately, and fairly.''

By a margin of 3-1, Americans said the media are too liberal rather than too conservative. Even most Democrats describe the media as ``too liberal'' rather than ``too conservative.''

This is the third poll released in the last month that has found Americans don't trust the media. The national media should recognize Americans' distrust and report the facts, not tell them what to think.

Madam Speaker, when Democrats introduced health care legislation, the Administration wanted to rush it through Congress before its cost could be calculated.

When Republicans wanted to review health care legislation before they were made to vote on it, Democrats refused to let them see the language.

Look for more of the same. For instance, the House Democrats' health care legislation prevents federal health care decisions from getting judicial review.

Stealth provisions of the House bill take away Americans' rights to challenge government decisions that will profoundly affect their lives. The courts are not allowed to review challenges to decisions to impose payment rates for doctors, hospitals and prescription drugs.

The courts can't review decisions to rest health care reimbursement on racial and ethnic criteria. And the courts can't review decisions intended to control other features of our health care system.

When Democrats hide what they are doing and limit Americans' rights, we know that the game is not about improving Americans' health care. It is about increasing government power at the people's expense.

And it's time to blow the whistle on that rigged game.

Mr. Speaker, here is what some of the world's most notorious thugs, dictators and human rights violators have said about President Obama: Moammar Qaddafi, the president of Libya, who gave a hero's welcome to the terrorists who blew up the Pan American airliner, killing over 100 Americans: ``We are content and happy if Obama can stay forever as the President.''

Fidel Castro: ``Everything he (President Obama) affirms is in contradiction with what the United States has done for 150 years.''

Hugo Chavez, the dictator and human rights abuser of Venezuela: ``Comrade Obama! Fidel, careful or we are going to end up to his right.''

Let's hope the President is not known by his admirers. Rather, let's hope that he will stand up to his admirers. Frankly, the world would be a safer place if he did.

Mr. Speaker, the national media don't have a credibility problem; they have a credibility void.

Five out of six Americans see the national news media as ``very or somewhat biased,'' according to a new poll by Sacred Heart University. Six out of seven Americans say the media have their own political and public policy positions and attempt to influence opinion and policy.

Nearly nine out of ten Americans say the media played a strong role in electing Barack Obama as President. Seven in ten say the national media are intent on promoting the Obama presidency. And a majority say the media are promoting the White House's health care plan without criticism.

The poll found that biased reporting is driving away the media's audience. Almost half of Americans have stopped watching a news outlet because of media bias.

If the national media want to keep their remaining audience, they need to restore Americans' trust by giving them the facts, not telling them what to think.

I thank my friend from Massachusetts, Congressman Delahunt, for yielding. I also want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their forbearance tonight in not strictly enforcing the time limits.

This gives me a second opportunity to thank my colleagues for their forbearance tonight.

Senator Kennedy was a friend, as are members of his family, including his son Patrick who is here tonight. It was

a privilege to have known him in lots of different ways. In my being a conservative Republican from Texas, and the Senator being a liberal Democrat from Massachusetts, many people wonder about this friendship. And therein lie many stories, but let me tell a couple tonight.

The first one goes back to when I was a fairly junior Member of Congress. I don't remember what the meeting was about, but there was a meeting in the Capitol in a small room. I was late getting to the meeting, and apparently so was Senator Kennedy. When I walked in, there were no remaining seats around the table, but there were a couple of seats over by a window. In fact, there was only one seat empty, and it was next to Senator Kennedy who at that point I had not met. I felt like I had nowhere else to go, so I sat by Senator Kennedy.

After we had been there about a half hour and were bored by the discussion that was going on at the table, we started talking. I mentioned to Senator Kennedy that, in fact, my grandmother had been from Boston, that I had enjoyed that part of the country many times on vacations, and we discovered that we had a mutual interest in sailing, although I have not gotten to do nearly as much of it as he has.

In any case, we spent the next hour just having a wonderful, friendly discussion. And that was the beginning of this friendship that I have referred to.

Not long after that, I was at another meeting. Actually this was a conference meeting in the Capitol, where there were four or five Members of the House and four or five members of the Senate in attendance trying to work out the differences on a particular piece of legislation. What so happened at that particular meeting, I was at the table and so was Senator Kennedy. In fact, he was directly across the table from me. And we had had a relatively mild discussion of the issues at hand, and it was time for Senator Kennedy to speak.

He stood up at the table, proceeded to lay into us Republicans as if we knew nothing about the issues at hand, made a very persuasive argument on his own behalf and on behalf of the issues that he cared about. The voice was so loud that, quite frankly, the walls of this small room were rattling. All the staff who were seated around the room were shaking. And I was wondering what I had gotten myself into. And here was the Senator with whom I had struck a friendship, and he was practically accusing all of us of not knowing what we were talking about on this particular legislation.

Well, the Senator talked for 5 or 10 minutes, completely dominated the room, and there really wasn't much else to say, or at least no one felt like saying anything in response to the Senator. Well, when he sat down, he picked up a piece of paper in front of them, grabbed a pencil, which I was absolutely sure he was going to break in half. But instead of breaking the pencil in half, he scribbled a note on this piece of paper. And everybody in the room is watching him. And he throws the piece of paper across the table to me. And I'm thinking, what is going on?

So I pick up the piece of paper. This must have been around July of that particular summer. I look at the piece of paper, and Senator Kennedy has written on the piece of paper, ``Lamar, what are you doing for vacation this summer?''

You had to sort of be there to appreciate what had gone on in the previous 10 minutes and the friendship that this particular note to me showed.

I very quickly folded the note up and put it in my pocket so no one else would see it. And, of course, everybody in the entire room was now wondering what was it that Senator Kennedy had written to the Republican across the table, Smith from Texas.

I never have revealed that note until right now. But that does show not only friendship, but both stories and many others that I could tell I think reveal a larger point. And that is the public is probably not nearly as aware as they might be of the genuine friendships that occur in Congress between individuals who might not agree on many of the political issues but who can agree to be friends and appreciate each other's company.

May I ask unanimous consent for 1 more minute?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

In this case, the idea that individuals can be friends from different sides of the aisle, and even if they disagree on some things political, it occurs more often than a lot of people might expect. In fact, that's probably one of the unwritten stories of Congress. And I'm glad it exists.

Certainly on the surface there is an extreme partisanship. Sometimes that is regrettable. But underneath the surface, there are friendships that can occur, for which I think both sides and both friends can be grateful, and I am certainly in that category.

I will be happy to yield to the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, President Obama and his agenda are in the news so much that media research groups are finding new ways to measure the coverage.

According to the Center For Media and Public Affairs, The New York Times has featured 405 stories about the Obama administration on its front page in the last 8 months. These stories total 120,000 column entries. That equals almost 2 miles of coverage devoted to President Obama and his agenda.

Not surprisingly, the New York Times featured more positive coverage of the President than any other news outlet, according to the Center For Media and Public Affairs. The national media should devote more time and a few more inches to covering the other side of the story.