Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, today we passed a truly historic bill because the Secretary of Treasury had come forward and told us that if we didn't pass it, we were to be afraid, be very afraid.

So people were beginning to panic around the country. Credit was freezing up. It was before and even more so after he spoke. And so it was necessary that we do something.

For most of us, we heard from a lot of people saying please don't bail out Wall Street, don't give them $700 billion. The last couple of days we heard from car dealers, from bankers, from shopkeepers, small mom and pop businesses about to go out of business saying you've got to do something. So Secretary Paulson's scare tactics had worked. The underlying problems may still be there. In fact, some of them are, and we still need to address them, and I have confidence that we will.

The underlying banks had money. The community banks, solid. But there is a crisis of confidence and lending is coming to a halt.

Now, some problems in the industry were created by Congress where we forced people to lend money to people they wouldn't have otherwise. That's a problem. That needed to be fixed. But we were told basically in theory by the Secretary that this would be a type of shock and awe, that we would put so much money into the Wall Street market that it would shock the economy and people would respond favorably and everything would be great as a result.

I, like my friend Ms. Foxx, hope that this works. I don't think it was necessary. I think it was problematic. And it ought to scare people when the government says, we need $700 billion to bail out an industry and that will make everybody better, and please raise the debt ceiling by $1.3 trillion. I thought it was just $700 billion. Well, we raised the debt ceiling by $1.3 trillion today just in case.

Apparently, the good news is we will spend $700 billion completely at the Secretary of the Treasury's whim, as he determines. You will see in the bill, those that bothered to read it, over and over ``as the Secretary determines,'' ``as the Secretary determines.'' And then we are going to have to hire some people to manage all these assets that we're buying. That may be outside the $700 billion. Maybe that's why we need to raise the limit to $1.3 trillion.

But being an historical fan, being such a student of history, you cannot find in the history of the Nation a time before when this government, this Congress, had so much faith in one person that they said, ``Here is $700 billion. Do with it as you will. Make our Nation well.''

Now, if you go back before our Constitution of 1787, you will find that one time something like this was done, in 1776, December 27 to be exact. Many of the people that had signed up in the Army had done so for 6 months, and they signed up around the time of the Declaration of Independence; so their time was going to be up in January. The Continental Congress heard that many of them would not reenlist; so they were scared.

George Washington never asked for this kind of power, but they knew this man. They knew he was not in it for himself and he wouldn't reward his friends. He was doing everything he could, to the tune of sacrificing his life and his fortune to help create this great land. So they gave him this power. He didn't use it. When he tried to get the guys to enlist, he gave one of the most impassioned speeches, and his pure leadership and example was enough to inspire them.

Well, there's a picture in the Rotunda just down the hall of him coming in. He wrote Bible verses on his resignation, and he tendered the resignation and did something no one had ever done in history: led a Revolutionary Army, won the Revolution, and then came in, resigned, and went home. Nobody had ever done it before or since. They could trust that man.

I've studied history. I am a fan of George Washington. He is a hero of mine. And Secretary Henry Paulson is no George Washington.

So let me leave you with this: When you hear anybody in the government say ``We're going to take your tax dollars and we're going to make you money,'' then that's when you need to be afraid because they have moved over into the socialist realm. And you can always make more money than the government can.

That's the thought I leave with you, with the hope and prayer that this does inspire the confidence that was looked for so the economy does free up. I had hoped leadership would do it, but now apparently it will take $700 billion, and may God help us all.

Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Madam Speaker, we've heard a number of comments about we've just got to bite the bullet

and do this. We heard the same things about let's bail out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We've got to take this one step. And then we heard from the former chairman of the FDIC, guys, you don't realize, if you do this, you are going to start the dominoes falling.

People have talked about this precipice.

Making this vote, passing this bill is jumping into the precipice because next we have got to come bail out the community banks that are doing just fine. If we would allow the banks to value these mortgage- based securities at the very value Paulson wants to take taxpayer money and buy them, they would be okay. Washington Mutual wouldn't have failed. We hear about we did the right thing with Chrysler and New York. Those were loans. This is putting the government in the position of buying all these things.

And as the FDIC former Chair said, when the Federal Government buys them, they immediately become worth less. That is the way it is. That is the way it will be.

And nobody seems to ask, who is it that is going to manage these assets? I have been asking. And finally the answer I got was, well, of course, we're going to have to outsource that.

You're going to outsource it to the very people that caused the problem. We're going to give them billions for assets they have mismanaged. And then we're going to hire them to manage those assets.

Please, please don't betray this Nation's great history. The committees used to do good work and ferret this stuff out.

They haven't been allowed to do their work, or they would have done a better job. Let the committees do the work. Let's get a better bill, and save America from Congress hurting it by jumping off this precipice.

Madam Speaker, this was a historic day. There was a bill in which we had Members who meant well, who had come to this floor and said, look, I understand we all have these principles, and this violates some of our principles, but we need to set those aside in order to avoid risk here. Well, first of all, that is a faulty premise. I just couldn't think of anything but the Declaration of Independence, when the people who founded this place came forward and said the principles of not having the king, not having the Government run everything are too important. And they signed their name where everybody could see, pledging their lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor, saying, ``On these principles we will stand or fall.''

And I think today the House, by its vote, said we're standing on the same principles. But not only that, these are the principles on which this Nation has become the greatest Nation in the world and the most prosperous. We can't abandon those principles.

So to have a bill that would come before Congress that basically gave the Secretary of the Treasury incredible powers--he was going to be able to bail out any bank in the world with American taxpayer dollars, the only exception was a central bank of a foreign government, but other banks that weren't central banks of other governments could be bailed out. And then, looking at judicial review, as that's my background, it was extraordinary. Nobody was going to be able to object legally and have a chance of prevailing under the standards that were set forth.

So the American people need to hear this message: Don't panic. You saw a Congress bipartisanly come in here and stand on principle and want you to know, don't panic, we are going to address this. We're going to come back, it will take a couple of days, and we'll look at the other solutions. One of them was proposed by the former Chairman of the FDIC and said, look, Paulson wanted $700 billion of American taxpayer money to buy these mortgage-based securities that, because the market is frozen, they have no value. And he is going to put a value on there, and it would be either the value, if you do a discounting based on the cash payments made on that mortgage, how regularly they're made, there's a way to get a formula and put a value on there, or you can base it on a discounted value of the underlying property that is securing that mortgage.

And then you have a value. And that's what Secretary Paulson was going to come in and spend to buy these assets with American taxpayer dollars. The FDIC former Chairman said, look, if you will just allow these banks to value these assets, what they're really worth and what Secretary Paulson was willing to come in and pay, then they're not under water, the banks don't fail. Washington Mutual didn't have to fail. And even when it failed, all those people that had money with Washington Mutual, they woke up the next day, they had the same money in the account, it is now under a JP Morgan name. And the same way with Wachovia; all their deposits, as I understand it, they have been purchased, and the people can wake up tomorrow and know they've got all that money, it's just under a different name, in the same amount.

Don't panic. When Roosevelt said, ``All we have to fear is fear itself,'' that is so true right now because this Congress is committed to principle in a bipartisan way. And I appreciate my friend, Ms. Kaptur, and her diligence in pursuing this. And we've heard some of the same presentations. And we're going to come back with a better bill; and if we don't, we're going to keep doing it until we get it right.

Some of the other proposals were excellent. You know, rather than make American taxpayers buy these things--including in, possibly, foreign countries--why not just say, look, if you will come and buy these assets, you won't have any capital gains on the income you make off of these, that encourages the free market to flow.

We have heard--I was not aware--that there may be hundreds of billions of American dollars in foreign banks. And one idea was, if you say we will allow you to repatriate those hundreds of billions of dollars if you will bring them in, no tax, no penalty, and buy these assets to help things along, that brings America money.

There are all kinds of fantastic ideas. And we are going to be stronger in America if the fearmongering will go away so Americans can use their own judgment and understand that this was a good thing today. Please don't fear, please don't panic. We're going to come back from this stronger, with our principles intact.

I appreciate my friend, Mr. Garrett's, comments. I heard him earlier tonight on Fox Business News. That's the first I had seen that channel, and it was quite good. Perhaps if they had been on the air longer, maybe we wouldn't be in this problem, people would be watching that.

But I heard one lady comment that there is an adage that ``Europe was formed by history and the United States was formed by philosophy.'' And there really is something to that. We were founded on the basis of people coming together. And of course at the Constitutional Convention they

couldn't come up with a constitution, the Articles of Confederation had all fallen apart, no common currency, it just didn't work, too loose of a web. And so they came together 4 years later, 1787, in the Constitutional Convention, and for merely 5 weeks couldn't agree on anything. And that's when the very elderly Benjamin Franklin gave his speech, that during the war in the early days, they never let a day go by without prayer, and they saw prayer answered. And so he made the motion that they begin each day with prayer, and that began. And now, all of a sudden we're able to come together with all these different philosophers through the ages and come up with what was the Constitution. Amazing.

But they had seen the New Testament practice early in the church, when they had everybody bring everything into a common storehouse and gave out equally. And that eventually results, as it always has to, when people see someone else is not working as hard as they are and they're getting an equal share, then they quit working and everything falls part. That led to the Apostle Paul coming around and saying, If you don't work, you don't eat. At Jamestown, we saw where the pilgrims tried the same thing. And then we saw in the Soviet Union--and you've got to give it to the Soviet Union, they made it 70 years under that premise, that you could bring everything into a common storehouse and give out equally, and they made it 70 years. That's got to be a record for that.

But here, they're wanting to take this government in the biggest socialist step in the history of the western hemisphere, $700 billion; and we're supposed to be comforted because our government may be able to make a profit on the taxpayers' money. The trouble is, government never makes the kind of profit that individuals could, and the government is not supposed to be in the business of making a profit. That is free enterprise. That's what we were founded on.

And, you know, I heard this quote years ago, I don't remember who said it, if they were quoting someone else, but especially since I've been in Congress I've found it to be true. And it may very well be true in this situation, it sure seems to be, because we've got people on Wall Street who are screaming, you have got to come in with this infusion of $700 billion of taxpayer money to bail out the banks. What is that going to do? As I understand it, it's going to buy mortgage- based securities--at a rate above where they may even be marked down to--and save those people that have stock in that bank, the officers that got them in that trouble, and that will keep their stock from being worthless. And the quote that I was alluding to is this, ``Hell hath no fury like a vested interest masquerading as a moral principle.'' And boy, have we been hearing that. ``You can't let the country fall.'' ``You can't let this panic ensue.'' We were told Friday, a week ago, 8 days ago, if we didn't have a deal by Monday, then the banks were going to start falling and it would be a domino and we would never get it back. It didn't happen. Some of us wanted to be more cautious.

But anyway, as I heard the gentleman say earlier, if the majority, if the Speaker wants to pass a bill, she sure doesn't need us. And I heard Madam Speaker say just earlier today on the news that it was very unpatriotic for the Republicans not rushing in sooner to be part of this $700 billion bailout discussion. And that was really striking because they didn't ask for our input when they ran in here and crammed down a non-energy energy bill that didn't allow any amendments. They didn't need our votes. They were going to cram it down the Nation's throat and tell them we gave them energy when there was not a drop of energy ever going to come from it. And then shortly thereafter the majority leader said, oh, one of the first orders of business, we'll put the moratorium back. So they don't need us, really, to pass a bill.

And another thing that I haven't heard talked about in these mortgage-based securities is actually who those are. Now, at one end-- and people don't want to talk about this--but at one end you've got people who thought if they could run in, get a no-money-down mortgage on a house that was a lot more than they could afford--when it was $1 million or $2 million or half a million--more than they could afford and they could hold it for a year, they could turn it, double their money, they never had to make a payment, and wow, they just doubled the value of the home and then came away with all this cash. When the house didn't double, then they had been in the house for a year and hadn't made a payment, didn't pay anything down--as the saying goes, ``no skin in the game''--and now we're supposed to bail them out? That's at one end.

In the middle, we have people who were really legitimately hurt, and not so much of their own accord. They knew what kind of house they wanted to look at. They were talked into, by bankers or realtors that shouldn't have, into buying more than they could afford. They got a mortgage that they really couldn't afford, thinking the house would greatly be enhanced in value and they would come out ahead. And they're truly suffering, and my heart goes out to them.

Then the other thing--and I haven't heard anybody talk about it on the floor here--but as it turns out, there are apparently a lot of illegal aliens who got mortgages. Because I know I had seen Bank of America advertising that they wanted to help the aliens, and under certain circumstances, gosh, we can get you a mortgage. So we're going to bail out mortgages for illegal aliens.

Let me tell you, back in the eighties, when the FDIC and RTC had taken over so many banks, what we saw was people come in and say, you know, I've been making my payment every month, and I'd like to negotiate a better deal. And they were told, well, heck no, you keep making your payments. I mean, I did outside counsel work for the RTC and FDIC. You would have some people come in later and say, okay, you wouldn't work with me before when I was making my payment every month, now I haven't paid for 6 months and they say, okay, now we'll work with you. We're sending the wrong message. And it is so critical that we not come out of this Chamber with a bill that hurts the America that we know and love so much.

There have to be consequences. And it troubles me much that the administration, the Secretary Treasurer has been forecasting this gloom and doom; ``there's going to be widespread panic.'' ``If Washington Mutual goes down it will be a domino and we will not stop the depression.'' Normally, it's the administration saying, nobody panic, we're going to get through this, this will all be okay, just stay with us, let's have faith in each other. And instead, all we're hearing is ``you've got to do something immediately or it's all going to fall apart.''

Well, it seems like, if you allow me to borrow from Kipling's poem and paraphrase a little bit, if you can keep your head while all those about you are losing theirs, you're probably the reason they're losing theirs. And that's what we seem to be seeing around here.

I appreciate the time and Mr. Garrett yielding. And I will yield back.

Madam Speaker, we are told that those who have refused to learn from history are destined to repeat it, and it is true. We are not learning from history.

I love the President, and I disagree about Iraq. But last night, the statements that came to a conclusion had an extremely faulty premise, and that premise was that the Federal Government is the only one that can properly manage these assets long enough, that has the patience.

That's ridiculous. We serve in this Congress. We can't even keep the same incentives in place for a year or two.

China, we just heard, is now telling its banks, don't loan to us. They are totalitarian, and we should be concerned about it, but they are moving toward capitalism. Let the private sector make its money and pay us tax. We are moving that way.

This will be the biggest socialist move in American history, and it breaks my heart that so many are thinking maybe this is all we can do. The Soviet Union lasted 70 years when they did this type of thing.

We won't make it that long. I beg colleagues on both sides, let's look at this and not move socialist.

Madam Speaker, at this time I do want to yield such time as he may consume to the man who has been talked about a great deal. If I didn't know better and didn't know him so well, I would say they've been exaggerating, but there has been no exaggeration, a great man, a great Representative. It's been an honor to serve with him

I yield to Jerry Weller of Illinois

Madam Speaker, we are going to miss the Honorable Jerry Weller and do appreciate all he has done for this country, not just for the people of Illinois.

Well it is with great pleasure that I rise tonight to pay tribute to a constituent, a good friend, a former colleague, Judge Cynthia Stevens Kent, who will be retiring at the end of this year following 25 years of judicial service. So I wanted to make this tribute a part of the permanent Congressional Record so that people in future generations would know of this great judge.

Throughout her years of faithful service to the State of Texas, Judge Kent has gained the respect and admiration of friends, colleagues and especially fellow judges. Her knowledge of the law and commitment to bettering the judiciary is not just well known in east Texas but throughout the country. East Texas has been blessed to have such a wise leader. And it's truly a better place to live because of her hard work.

After receiving her law degree from South Texas College of Law in Houston, Judge Kent moved to Tyler, Texas, with her husband, Don. She opened her own law firm, but in 1984 she left the lucrative practice to dedicate herself to public service. For 4 years she served as judge of the Smith County Court at Law Number Two. She oversaw misdemeanor criminal cases, workers' compensation cases, substantive civil cases, condemnation cases, mental health, probate, juvenile, family law and appeals from justice of the peace and municipal courts.

After 4 years in that capacity, Judge Kent was successfully elected as the first woman to serve on the Texas 114th Judicial District Court serving both Smith and Wood counties. As judge of this court, she has overseen felony criminal cases, divorce and family law, juvenile, land claims, election contests, very substantive civil cases, workers' compensation, contested probate matters, and juvenile law in general. She has diligently presided over this court for the past 20 years.

Now throughout her career, Judge Kent has established herself as a wise, hardworking, law and order judge. There is not much question about that. She has cleared a large backlog of cases while gaining a reputation among criminal defendants as a judge you wanted to avoid.

Judge Kent is widely known for her strong commitment to teaching and to furthering her own legal education. During her time on the bench, she received a masters of judicial studies from the National Judicial College, and she is currently working toward candidacy for a Ph.D. She served as a faculty instructor at the National Judicial College teaching ``advanced evidence'' and ``handling capital cases.'' She has spoken and taught at countless judicial conferences, seminars and courses throughout the country, all the while dedicating herself to the east Texas community by serving as a volunteer instructor at Texas College in Tyler, Texas.

Judge Kent has written and co-authored numerous publications, and she has served on a variety of boards and associations. Most recently she was chosen by Governor Rick Perry to be a member of the Governor's Criminal Justice Advisory Council which is tasked with the difficult job of reviewing the criminal laws in Texas. It's undeniable that Judge Kent has distinguished herself as one of the Nation's leading judicial scholars.

Throughout all of the many demands of her professional career, Judge Kent has managed to raise a wonderful family with the love and support of her

husband, Don Kent. The Kents have been married for over 32 years and have three sons, Drew, Jarad and Wayne.

Judge Kent's dedication and commitment to God, her family, the law and to faithfully serving east Texas is evident not just from the accomplishments already mentioned, but from the admiration and kind words of almost anyone across the region. She has been a wise judge, a dependable colleague, a patient instructor and a dear friend whose leadership has been an inspiration to so very many. Whether you agreed or disagreed with her, you never wondered where she stood. ``Shy and withdrawn'' were never adjectives used in the same sentence with her name.

During my years as a judge, I served at the opposite end of the courthouse on the same hall, same floor. It was always such a comfort to know that as difficult questions arose on exceedingly complex and even life-and-death cases, I had a knowledgeable friend whose judgment and advice could be trusted at the other end of the hall. All it took was a walk down the hall to her office or she to mine for an insightful, methodical discussion of the law to arrive at a proper solution. I was always in awe of just how amazing she was at multitasking like no one I had ever seen. She is truly an extraordinary person.

Judge Kent is to be congratulated for her so many years of dedicated service, and now with retirement, she should be thanked for her committed devotion to the people of east Texas. My condolences on the other hand also have to go out to Smith County residents on the loss of such a dedicated jurist.

May God bless Judge Cynthia Stevens Kent and all of the work that she has done.

Now Madam Speaker, at this time I would like to yield such time as he may consume to my friend from Illinois, Mr. John Shimkus. We have been in a financial crisis, we're told, and my friend, John Shimkus, has been talking about something that could have avoided the whole problem.

And I would yield such time as he may consume.

Would the gentleman be willing to engage in a colloquy?

Here we have been hearing so much about the financial crisis, and the Secretary of the Treasury has said that we need $700 billion to bail out Wall Street. He doesn't use those words. It's so ironic. We've been hearing Boone Pickens talk about $700 billion. But he has been talking about the massive transfer of wealth from the United States to countries, many of whom don't like us, where we're buying their oil, when we could be producing our own if the majority would just let us do so.

So when we talk about a financial crisis, and we talk about that influx of $700 billion being spent on American energy and American jobs being created, because I know you and I have talked about it before, and you haven't touched on it tonight about the effect of that $700 billion being spent on our shores in ANWR. Do you want to touch on that?

Looking at the map that the gentleman from Illinois had prepared, it is ironic to me. Like up in New England, we see the area that is off limits for drilling. Well, it is not that New Englanders are against drilling the Outer Continental Shelf. In fact, apparently they are 100 percent for it, as long as it moves up the coast just a little bit and our friends from Canada drill right off of their part of the coast. Then our friends from Canada, as the gentleman has indicated, are gracious enough to pop it back down and sell it to us.

Now, I don't know if those sands under the Outer Continental Shelf are such that those formations, that pool is actually draining some of our oil that they are selling back to us, or our gas and selling it back to us. But if so, that is awfully gracious of them to do so, to sell us back some of our own oil and gas.

Then we have people saying under no circumstances whatsoever do we ever want any drilling done less than 50 miles off our coast. Well, you look at Florida, the map that you have got there, you see Cuba, they are 90 miles from the Florida coast, which nowadays under international law most countries claim 200 miles out, except where you share an area like that, in which case you split it.

So now Cuba is being kind enough to other countries, whether it is Russia, China, Venezuela, to allow them to come drill within 50 miles of the Florida coast, and, who knows, maybe they will be willing to sell us back some of our own oil and gas too for an appropriate profit going to those countries. But how ironic. They say they are against it, but it is not really being against it. It is just in our little backyard area.

I was amazed as the gentleman was talking about the arguments that have been made for some months, and I have got to say, I thank the gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Shimkus, who has been the leader on this issue and been terrific about it. John Peterson from Pennsylvania, we are going to miss him. He has been a great leader in discussing energy.

But as we talked about it through August, Ralph Regula came and spoke one day on the floor without the mikes and with the lights dimmed. I did not know until Mr. Regula pointed it out, he was on Resources back in 1981, and, of course, President Carter had signed an executive order. And in that order, and Ralph had that as well, he had said that the Outer Continental Shelf was such a vast great resource for energy for America, and the two words that stuck in my mind in President Carter's order was that it should be ``developed expeditiously.''

Well, according to Ralph, they got lobbied in 1981 by wealthy beachfront property owners on the California coast. They didn't want to see a platform out there within their sunset. They lobbied hard and eventually they won. Okay, we will give California a moratorium on drilling off their coast.

According to Ralph, immediately Florida beachfront landowners, the wealthy, not the poor and the downtrodden, not the hardest working in America, but the wealthy beachfront property owners, and I am proud of them, I am glad they are able to do that, they came rushing in. Wait a minute, you gave a moratorium to the wealthy beachfront property owners in California. We need to have one in Florida. So, they lobbied hard enough, had the wherewithal, the money to do a good job lobbying, and they got a moratorium.

And Ralph said, he said when they gave the moratorium to California, the committee will rue the day we ever did it, because that was 27 years ago. Then Florida got theirs. Then other States started coming in and saying, you gave it to California and Florida, we ought to get one too. That is where that came from.

Of course, in Texas, pretty pragmatic, we heard lots of horror stories. If you put platforms out there, it will kill all the aquatic life. You will never get another shrimp or fish out of the gulf.

Lo and behold, we have the platforms out there. They withstood category 5 hurricanes as far as not leaking. Some of them were destroyed, but they still didn't leak. And I kind of thought it looked pretty, you know. The sun sets, and out there you start seeing lights twinkling on the horizon, it is platforms. I know I am getting energy from it, and it is a whole lot better than having tankers come along and leak.

I was amazed, and that came because of the discussion we had with the lights dimmed, the microphones off, and Ralph Regula giving us a little bit of history.

I appreciate the input, the insights. This deals with the energy issue, but it deals with the financial crisis in America. As the gentleman alluded to, this has helped contribute to a perfect storm in America for a financial crisis. But we are not hearing people on the other side of the aisle, and we haven't heard Secretary Paulson say, you know what, that kind of infusion of wealth could really boost the country, and then you wouldn't have to worry about bailing out the greediest among us that were on Wall Street and drove some companies into the dirt. Instead, what we have heard is we have got to spend $700 billion to build this governmental entity that will start managing assets.

Now, I think the world of the President. I think history is going to be good to him. He is an honorable, noble man. The biggest problem he has I

think is what Jeff Foxworthy says about people that speak with a southern accent; people hear the accent and immediately deduct 50 IQ points from how smart they think you are.

He is much smarter than people give him credit for. But he has listened to people like Secretary Paulson and others who have told him it is all gloom or all doom, and then has come before us and he said last night only the Federal Government could be patient enough to manage these assets.

I immediately thought, in the Resources Committee 2 years ago, in the last Congress, we put in a biomass incentive program where we would incentivize people to help create this alternative energy source. People bought into that, like we wanted them to, and they started building biomass plants. And when they are about to come on line, this Congress in the Resources Committee comes back and knocks that out. They say, no, we are not going to do that incentive program anymore. We are going to spend several million dollars to study, to see whether it is really feasible. Of course it was feasible. People relied on the government's promise that they would have an incentive, and then we yanked it out from under them.

So when I hear somebody say how patient the Federal Government is, we can't even keep the same tax incentives in place for 2 years so that people can take advantage of them. They know they would have trouble trusting the Federal Government.

Then I can also tell you as former outside counsel for the RTC and FDIC, I can't go into individual cases, but it is public knowledge and you can talk to anybody who ever dealt with the RTC or FDIC, when people knew the government owned an asset and they were needing to sell it, even if they could sit on it for a number of years, they always knew if the government owns it, we can pay less and get away with paying less than if a private entity owned it. They knew that.

The same way, if the government was going to buy it, they knew they should hold up the Federal Government, because eventually they would get what they want, and that is just the way it works. The private sector is the better place.

We have had some people who were greedy and ran these things into the ground. This Congress previously, as Congressman Frank and Senator Dodd, forced requirements on lending that caused them to make loans to people that couldn't repay them. We have had questions arise now as to potentially many of those loans may have been to illegal aliens, or, as they say in Great Britain, irregular migrants. But there is an accountability issue, and Congress has not done a good job of holding these people accountable, and that needs to start.

I am working on a bill, and some people are not real crazy about it, but there needs to be accountability. In the public sector, publicly traded businesses, there is a concept in contract law called the corporate veil. So if you are acting as an officer of a corporation and you commit some act of negligence, the corporation can be sued, but not pierce the corporate veil to go after the officer because he was acting on behalf of the corporation, unless you could prove he was acting outside that course and scope with the corporation. Then you might pursue him personally.

I would like to see if an officer makes decisions that a reasonable and prudent officer would not have made under the same or similar circumstances, and it is one of the or a proximate cause towards the demise, the bankruptcy, the insolvency of the corporation that is publicly traded, then perhaps there should be no corporate shield, and in the bankruptcy court the bankruptcy judge could look at the assets of that officer and make a determination legally, was this negligence, was it a proximate cause for the insolvency or bankruptcy, and, if so, let's bring those millions back you got from your golden parachute and put them back in the employee pension fund or to help some of the debts that you ran up before you left them high and dry.

There are things we can do. I am not getting a lot of traction on talking to friends on that, but, who knows? We may get them back.

We heard this morning that China banks have been told by their government not to make loans, one-day loans to U.S. banks, because they are concerned about their solvency. It is amazing that China would need to teach us a lesson about capitalism.

But I do thank my friend from Illinois. I appreciate your participation and insights into energy, because it is such a huge part of the solution to our financial crisis. So I thank you.

I was intrigued when a number of our Members went over to China 3 years ago. We talked to a number of CEOs about why you moved your company, why you moved your facilities, your plant, to China.

I figured the answer would be solely, well, it was just cheap labor. But the number one reason was that their corporate tax was half of what our corporate tax is in the United States. Then not only that, but China was willing to negotiate even lower taxes for a period of time to incentivize their coming to China.

Then you talk to them further, China has had some very polluted bodies of water, some of them were told if you will come and set your factory up on this body of water that's totally polluted, start using the water from that body, put it back clean, then we will cut you a better deal on corporate tax, and that it was well worth it for them to take advantage of that. So China was using corporations to help clean up their environment that they had made such a mess.

Having been an exchange student to the Soviet Union back in 1973, I am quite familiar with the fact that over there, any money that was paid was supposed to go into the Federal Government. That was socialism. Then everybody got a check got a check from this central government. That's how socialism worked.

I didn't realize, until I went to China, they don't do it that way. The Chinese do have a totalitarian government, and it's cause for great concern, but they have also noticed that in Hong Kong, and around the country, if you incentivize entrepreneurship and just take a part of that success, you make a whole lot more money than if you just make everybody bring in to the central coffers and then split it up equally.

That didn't work in the New Testament, when the New Testament Church tried. It ultimately resulted in the Apostle Paul saying, if you don't work, you don't eat.

It didn't work when the pilgrims did it. When they came to America they had a compact that they just bring into the central storehouse and then divided up equally. But then that ended up causing people, pilgrims, to notice, well, I am killing myself working here, and he is not working as hard I am, and he is getting the same amount, so they quit working.

I will never forget going to a collective farm, outside of Kiev, and I spoke just enough Russian back in those days when I could ask a question. I was intrigued because it was midmorning, around 10 a.m. or so, and there were a bunch of farmers sitting around in the shade.

I asked, you know, when do you work? Anybody that's worked on a farm back in east Texas or in west, anywhere in Texas, knows if you are going to work out there, you get up early, and you do everything you can as early as you can, because it starts getting hot. It was the same way there. I said, when do you work in Russia, and they laughed. One of the men, and I am not sure how many rubles he said, but he said, I make the same number of rubles if I am here in the shade or out there in the sun, so I am here in the shade.

That's why socialism doesn't work, and that's why, when we had this proposal from Secretary Paulson to have the government seize this massive amount of assets and then manage them for years and years, we could see this is the biggest step towards socialism that we could have ever imagined in this country, couldn't believe it was being proposed by our administration.

It's still unbelievable to me. We know the principles. As I have said before, I started making speeches in junior high and in debates in high school talking about the free market and entrepreneurship. If you set the American spirit free, it's amazing what they could do.

Now they want to come in and have me say that that was all a lie? I don't

believe it was a lie. I believe the government makes sure everybody has a level playing field, punish the wrongdoers, punish the evildoers, but then keep that level field available out there to play on, and then let entrepreneurship reign.

That's the best way to go. That's not what's proposed here, so there was a bunch of others. We had a plan that we proposed in the Republican Study Committee that would cut capital gains, cut income tax or anybody that will come in and buy these assets.

Boy, you think about that, we would stir up the market, get them excited about coming in and making money. It would be fantastic. We wouldn't have to create this huge bureaucracy to do that. It just comes back again to the USSR that lasted 70 years, because it was doomed to failure, couldn't stand, versus the free market.

You look at Ireland. I was talking to somebody from Ireland, and I understood them to say their corporate tax was 12 percent, China 17 percent, we are double that. France and Germany saw the way Ireland has become, I believe, the fourth fastest-growing country in the world, as companies are flocking in there, more jobs, better standard of living.

France and Germany, who had been tending towards socialism are now realizing, whoa, if we will just cut our taxes, then people will flock into here like they are into Ireland and like they have been into China to do business.

Now, I appreciated my friend, Mr. McCotter, pointing out that Secretary Paulson could end up with a piece of paper, he was hoping to come away from their discussions today, come out, wave a piece of paper in front of the cameras, say we have this agreement, and this means fleece in our time, because Americans taxpayers would not be well served.

I appreciate my time is about to expire, and I appreciate the time tonight to talk about these issues, but there has got to be accountability. I believe you will have full cooperation in making people fully accountable on both sides of the aisle, but let's don't turn $700 billion of the economy over to the government. Let's incentivize good conduct. Let's incentivize the free market at work because socialism doesn't.

I yield back and appreciate this opportunity.

Madam Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 10 o'clock and 22 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until tomorrow, Friday, September 26, 2008, at 9 a.m.

Mr. Speaker, there's great concern all over the Nation for those who follow what is going on in our financial institutions. That concern is entirely appropriate.

There's great anxiety all over the Nation by hardworking men and women who do not know how they're going to be able to continue to pay the soaring energy costs for both their vehicles and their homes.

Yet, still, the Congressional leadership continues to refuse to put a piece of legislation on the floor for a vote that could immediately send us well on our way to energy independence by allowing us to produce that with which this Nation has been so blessed.

There's much anger over the disgusting immorality of corporate executives who padded their own pockets with millions of dollars by creative bookkeeping and representations that mortgage securities had value that they did not actually have.

There's incredulity in America over Members of Congress who have spent years decrying the culture of corruption, only to have information come out raising questions about failures to pay proper taxes under the income tax laws that may have been written by such person.

There's incredulity that the FBI might find cold hard cash secreted in a freezer 3 years ago, causing people to wonder why nothing has happened.

There's amazement from those who have bothered to notice that last year a vote could be lost by the Democratic majority, fair and square, then the rules be changed to allow a different outcome.

There's astonishment among those who have bothered to notice that the majority leadership could continue to advertise on-line that this would be the most open Congress in history, with complete use of the committee process, and each bill being subjected to full amendment opportunities and across-the-board input, yet, we continue to have the most closed and dictatorial Congress in memory.

While people in America were being overwhelmed by killer gasoline prices and home energy costs, the United States Congress took 5 weeks off. When over 100 Members of Congress played by the rules and signed up in a timely manner to speak for 5 minutes on the last day of our session in July, before the 5-week recess, the majority party used that majority, yet again, to cram down an abrupt adjournment on us to prevent our speaking with the microphones on. Yet, we spoke with the microphones off anyway.

When points of order have been raised regarding rules violations or alleged ethical malfeasance, the majority has used their power to table legitimate objections to prevent the violations from being corrected and from even being called violations. They've even gone so far as to have the transcript of the proceedings in this Chamber changed to cover up the inappropriate behavior and rulings from the day before, but the video certainly revealed the truth.

I simply could not and still struggle to understand how this body could go so far off course. When we find that our Nation has been brought to the brink of financial failure, there was fear with wailing and gnashing of teeth.

But we find that in 2002 and 2003, when the Bush administration was pushing for and demanding reforms of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac just to try to avoid this type financial disaster that they foresaw, the efforts at reform were blocked by people against whom allegations have now arisen in the Senate who were reported to have gotten sweetheart deals from the financial industry. The foresight of such potential problem is to the Bush Administration's credit. But the failure to continue to beat the drum, warning that something was amiss does fall at the feet of the administration and Members on both sides of Congress.

There's one word that can prevent the destruction of our little experiment in democracy, as some of our forefathers referred to it, that could also prevent the destruction of a family, of a company, of a society or of a government or a Nation, and that word is accountability.

When Adam and Eve were convinced there was no accountability, they fell from grace.

When the only man mentioned in the Bible who was said to have a heart after God's own actually had no earthly accountability, King David himself committed atrocious wrongs.

When people are convinced that there is no accountability for sexual relations outside marriage, and there turns out to be consequences of a pregnancy, some think it would be punishment to allow a child to be born alive.

When the highest officers in a company think they can raid the retirement funds of their longstanding employees and be mega-wealthy, with no one to whom to account, they raid whatever is in the company as if it were their own.

Some corporate leaders allow workers to come into this country illegally, just so the owners can pocket a little more profit, despite the fact that it diminishes the society and Nation from following the rule of law and for being a Nation of laws.

And though these same people can't see it coming, history makes very clear that such violations of the rules of law will destroy a Nation and society. It makes this Nation appear, at times, to be a corrupt Third World Nation where the law just does not mean much.

When a society believes that if it feels good, do it, and there is no accountability, society ceases and an animal kingdom full of the basest instincts of animals takes over.

When Members of Congress think that they're too big and important to ever be accountable, they display hubris or arrogance and engage in tawdry financial dealing with the taxpayers' money. When people in government begin to feel that there is no accountability for them, they will allow massive overspending that the country cannot afford. They will create monuments to themselves with other people's money. They will allow the vast national wealth to be sent to other countries that do not like us very much, just so the energy does not have to be produced in the backyard of the selfish.

In 1995, the House and Senate both passed a bill that would bring about drilling in what Jimmy Carter, as President, designated for drilling, because there is no wildlife there. It's a perfect place for drilling. And that is in the coastal area where there are billions of barrels of oil. But President Clinton vetoed the bill.

In the last Congress, we passed a bill to provide for drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf, but the Democrats blocked it from getting the required 60 votes to allow cloture in the Senate, so there was no vote up or down on the bill itself in the Senate, and it died there; while our country was dying.

Here our country is in a terribly difficult time with these extremely high energy rates, and our Democratic leadership still supports sending $700 billion a year to nations, many of whom do not like us. If that $700 billion sends familiar, it's because it's also the amount that Secretary Paulson says that we need at this time to save the mortgage and financial system.

Congressman Joe Barton proposed that, in this time of financial crisis, why not open up ANWR out of necessity? Why not open up the Outer Continental Shelf and use the billions of dollars that will come from that to help

mitigate the expense of financial crisis here?

What a great idea. But the majority leadership does not see that this Nation will have an accountable judgment day where we will be accountable for what we did not do to use the blessings that we have here in this Nation of tremendous amounts of energy.

So what will it take to get people here to see that you cannot spend unabatedly, and you cannot send money overseas with reckless abandon without an accountability, a judgment day coming?

There will indeed be a high price to pay. As Chuck Colson once said, you cannot have the morals of Woodstock and not have the current problems. If you do have people whose world view is that if it feels good you should just do it then, as Chuck Colson says, you're going to have Columbines.

When the message of a majority of those serving in Congress is that we will only follow the rules when it is convenient, then the message to the world is that we will not be bound by the rule of law, as we will change it whenever we want to suit us as we please.

When our Nation's children see the adults sending such a clear message by their conduct, and the rules don't apply to us if we don't want them to, according to the majority, then you can expect the Nation's children to soon follow suit. That leads us to Enrons among the adults, the Fannie Mae fiascoes among the adults. And from our children, you begin to see wayward kids thinking maybe it will feel good to shoot people, so let's see.

Well, if there's a higher power, there's a reason for accountability. If there is no higher power, then there is no reason to worry about our accountability. You can get away with all you want in this life with no adverse consequences at all. For those who think there is no ultimate accountability, no ultimate judgment of the universe, I would point you to the discussion C.S. Lewis had in his book ``Mere Christianity.''

He had said that when he was an atheist, he used to love to tweak Christians by saying, ``Why don't you just admit that there cannot be a just God over the universe when there is so much injustice in the world?'' And no matter what the Christian would say, he would come back and say, ``Yes, yes, yes. That's all well and good. But wouldn't it be easier just to admit there cannot be a just God over the universe when there is so much injustice in this world?''

Eventually, it hit him like a ton of bricks. How could he say--and who was he to say--that there was injustice unless there is some absolute, unwavering outside source of right and wrong? If there were not such a universal source of right and wrong that is written on the hearts of people, then how could anyone ever know or say that there was injustice in the world? You couldn't know.

Once you come to grips with the fact that there is a universal source of right or wrong in the world, then you have to come to grips with the fact that there must be a good God that made it so, and there will be accountability some day. Therefore, no one will ultimately be above the law.

Now, not everyone sees everything exactly the same, of course. C.S. Lewis noted that that just because some can sing closer to the notes printed on a page doesn't mean the music doesn't exist. It just means some do a better job of hitting closer to what the exact and appropriate note is.

There is right and wrong in the world, and most people innately know that. But they rationalize--and we find it all across the House and in Congress--people rationalize that it is more fun to say there is no God, perhaps no Creator so they don't have to feel guilty or consider that some day someone will judge them.

So long as we recognize, as our founders did, that there is a Creator who has endowed us with unalienable rights, then we should recognize that we have a duty to protect those rights for the sake of ourselves and those that follow. Perhaps that is why there is such an effort underway to sterilize and remove God or any reference to Him from all public buildings and documents these days.

If we keep mentioning God, as the founders of this Nation did constantly, then it reminds us that we will some day be accountable even if we get away with things today.

People do not like to feel guilty so they want to strike God out of everything. For example, as our society progressed to the point that we were too smart, too elusive to be accountable to God, we had our first national memorial in 2003 open that does not anywhere in it mention the word ``God.'' First memorial to do that. That was the Franklin D. Roosevelt Memorial. In all of those acres at the expansive memorial, there is no mention of God, Creator, Providence, Holy Trinity, Holy Spirit, Lord, all of these different names that were in our founding documents. They're still found throughout our documents, if anyone cares to look.

Nor is there any mention of the Latin words that are found in our official great seal that's on the back of every dollar bill. If you don't believe it, pull it out and look. Those Latin words are ``Annuit Coeptis,'' meaning He, God, has smiled on our undertaking.

Those words are also found around the Capitol and in the Senate Chamber and in the congressional prayer chapel.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was a leader of this Nation who believed strongly in accountability and that there was a God before whom that would happen.

On June 6, 1944, D-day, President Roosevelt went on national radio and did an amazing thing as President: he led the Nation in prayer. And I would like to just read that for you at this time.

And for those that may look in, Mr. Speaker, they will be able to know from the poster, this is President Franklin D. Roosevelt's prayer during his radio broadcast to the Nation on June 6. Here is that prayer as I read it verbatim as President Franklin Roosevelt gave it.

And understand, as President Roosevelt prayed this prayer, our soldiers were dying fighting valiantly during D-day trying to save the world and make it safer for democracy. This was his prayer:

``My fellow Americans:

``Last night when I spoke with you about the fall of Rome, I knew at this moment that troops of the United States and our allies were crossing the Channel in another and greater operation. It has come to pass with success thus far. And so in this poignant hour, I ask you to join me in prayer.''

President Roosevelt went on, ``Almighty God: Our sons, pride of our Nation, this day have set upon a mighty endeavor, a struggle to preserve our Republic, our religion, and our civilization, and to set free a suffering humanity.

``Lead them straight and true; give strength to their arms, stoutness to their hearts, steadfastness to their faith.

``They will need Thy blessings. Their road will be long and hard. For the enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces. Successes may not come with rushing speed, but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph.

``They will be sore tried, by night and by day, without rest--until the victory is won. The darkness will be rent by noise and flame. Men's souls will be shaken with the violences of war.

``For these men are lately drawn from the ways of peace. They fight not for the lust of conquest. They fight to end conquest. They fight to liberate. They fight to let justice arise, and tolerance and goodwill among all Thy people. They yearn but for the end of battle, but their return to the haven of home.

``Some will never return. Embrace these, Father, and receive them. Thy heroic servants, into Thy Kingdom.

``And for us at home--fathers, mothers, children, wives, sisters, and brothers of brave men overseas, whose thoughts and prayers are ever with them--help us, Almighty God, to rededicate ourselves for renewed faith in Thee in this time of great sacrifice.

``Many people have urged that I call the Nation into a single day of special prayer. But because the road is long and the desire is great, I ask that our people vote themselves into a continuance of prayer. As we rise to each new day, and again when each day is spent, let words of prayer be on our lips, invoking Thy help to our efforts.

``Give us strength, too--strength in our daily tasks to redouble the contributions we make in the physical and the material support of our Armed Forces.

``And let our hearts be stout, to wait out the long travail, to bear sorrows that may come, to impart our courage unto our sons, wherever they may be.

``And, O Lord, give us faith. Give us faith in Thee; faith in our sons; faith in each other; faith in our united crusade. Let not the keenness of our spirit ever be dulled. Let not the impacts of temporary events, of temporal matters of but fleeting moment--let not these deter us in our unconquerable purpose.

``With Thy blessing, we shall prevail over the unholy forces of our enemy. Help us to conquer the apostles of greed and racial arrogances. Lead us to the saving of our country, and with our sister nations into a world unity that will spell a sure peace--a peace invulnerable to the schemings of unworthy men. And a peace that will let all of men live in freedom, reaping the just rewards of their honest toil.

``Thy will be done, Almighty God.

``Amen.''

That was a prayer of our President, Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Now, in the 1950s, senator majority leader Lyndon Johnson was sick of having churches harp on him over alleged immortality, so he fixed them. He added a provision to the charitable institution laws that governed churches that says in fact you could not maintain your charitable tax- free status if you got involved in politics. That dramatically changed the Nation that had been known from our beginning.

There again, majority leader Johnson's efforts were an attempt to prevent judgment for what was alleged as improper conduct. No one enjoys accountability. But to have a free Nation, a just Nation, a prosperous Nation, and a blessed Nation, there must be accountability.

Then in 1962, an unaccountable Supreme Court that begins every single session with a prayer that God will save that honorable court, they changed nearly 200 years of precedence by ruling there could be no prayer in schools.

As mentioned in 2003, the first national memorial opened as the FDR Memorial that never mentioned God. In 2004, the second memorial in United States history opened that did not mention God anywhere either. That was the World War II Memorial.

Understand, these are both beautiful memorials. They're just Godless, yet their subjects were certainly not.

Amazingly, the park service had quotes from Eisenhower and Roosevelt in the World War II Memorial that had to be cut right at the right place so their quotes would not mention ``God'' or ``Almighty God'' as those two gentlemen and great leaders did.

I have a Bible here. My aunt says my uncle, my late uncle, got when he entered World War II. On the front, it says--it has got a metal cover--``May the Lord be with you.'' He said he was issued this as he went into the Army.

Right inside the fly leaf there's a message. It says, ``The White House, Washington. As Commander in Chief, I take pleasure in commending the reading of the Bible to all who serve in the Armed Forces of the United States. Throughout the centuries, men of many faiths and diverse origins have found in the sacred books words of wisdom, counsel, and inspiration. It is a fountain of strength. And now as always, an aid in attaining the highest aspirations of the human soul.''

Signed Franklin D. Roosevelt.

They used to issue these to people going into the service.

Let me read to you the speech that was given on the floor of the United States Senate by Senator Robert Byrd on June 27, 1962, which is the day or two after the Supreme Court ruled there would be no public prayer in school.

I'm reading it as Senator Byrd's speech appeared in the Congressional Record.

And Mr. Speaker, I've got a chart here that says it's Senator Robert Byrd's speech on the Senate floor, June 27, 1962.

And this is what he said. Senator Byrd, 1962:

``In as much as our greatest leaders have shown no doubt about God's proper place in the American birthright, can we, in our day, dare do less?

``In no other place in the United States are there so many, and such varied official evidences of deep and abiding faith on God in the part of Government as there are in Washington.

``Every session in the House and Senate begins with prayer. Each House has its own chaplain.

``The Eighty-Third Congress set aside a small room in the Capitol, just off the rotunda for the private prayer meditation of Congress. The room is always open when Congress is in session, but it is not open to the public. The room's focal point is a stained glass window showing George Washington kneeling in prayer. Behind him is etched these words from Psalm 16:1 `Preserve me, O God, for in Thee do I put my trust.'

``Inside the rotunda is a picture of the Pilgrims about to embark from Holland on the sister ship of the Mayflower, the Speedwell. The ship's revered Chaplain Brewster, who later joined the Mayflower, has open on his lap the Bible. Very clear are the words, `The New Testament according to our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.' ''

On the sail is the motto of the Pilgrims, ``In God We Trust, God With Us.''

The phrase, ``In God We Trust,'' appears opposite the President of the Senate, who is the Vice President of the United States. The same phrase, in large words inscribed in the marble, backdrops the Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Above the head of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court are the Ten Commandments, with the great American eagle protecting them. Moses is included among the great lawgivers in Herman A. MacNeil's marble structure group on the east front. The crier who opens each session closes with the words, ``God save the United States and this honorable Court.''

Engraved on the metal on the top of the Washington Monument are the words: ``Praise be to God.'' Actually, parenthetically, the words are Laos Deo, Latin, meaning ``Praise be to God,'' and actually, again parenthetically, that was put on the east side of the top of the Washington Monument for a purpose. Because those, so many decades, years ago, wanted it such that when the sun touched the Nation's capital, Washington, D.C., the first thing that the sun would touch would be the Latin words, Laos Deo, ``Praise be to God.'' Interesting.

Lining the walls of the stairwell are such Biblical phrases as ``Search the Scriptures,'' ``Holiness to the Lord,'' ``Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old he will not depart from it.''

Numerous quotations from scripture can be found within the Library of Congress' walls. One reminds each American of his responsibility to his Maker: ``What doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justly and love mercy and walk humbly with thy God,'' Micah 6:8.

Another in the lawmaker's library preserves the Psalmist's acknowledgement that all nature reflects the order and beauty of the Creator, ``The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament showeth His handiwork,'' Psalm 19:1. And still another reference, ``The light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not,'' John 1:5.

Millions have stood at the Lincoln Memorial and gazed up at the statue of the great Abraham Lincoln. The sculptor who chiseled the features of Lincoln in granite all but seems to make Lincoln speak his own words inscribed into the walls.

He said, ``That this Nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom, and that government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.''

At the opposite end, on the north wall, his Second Inaugural Address alludes to ``God,'' the ``Bible,'' ``providence,'' ``the Almighty,'' and ``divine attributes.''

It then continues: As was said 3000 years ago, so it still must be said, ``The judgements of the Lord are true and righteous altogether.''

On the south banks of Washington's Tidal Basin, Thomas Jefferson still speaks: ``God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a Nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God? Indeed I tremble for my country

when I reflect that God is just, that his justice cannot sleep forever.''

These words of Jefferson are a forceful and explicit warning that to remove God from this country will destroy it.

Those are the words of Senator Robert Byrd back in 1962.

We have a visitor's center, the Capitol Visitor's Center, CVC for short. It cost over $621 million. It is slated to open December 2 of this year. So far, it had been completely sterilized of any mention of God in any form. It was not until over 100 Members of Congress sent a letter and followed up repeatedly with more concern that we finally got a concession this past week that ``In God We Trust'' would be put above the mock-up of the Speaker's rostrum area there in the visitor's center, because what had been there before was a fraud and a deception and attempted to represent that there was no ``In God We Trust'' above our Speaker's head.

There will also be accountability someday for this majority leadership playing so fast and loose with the rules. When rules and laws don't matter, then we lose this blessed country that was founded as a Nation of laws, because people are not perfect. People need rules. We need accountability. That means that the majority leadership, if they play by the rules, they're going to lose a vote every now and then, and that's okay. Don't break the rules just to keep from losing a vote. The rule itself is too important to do that. It also means that the Speaker and other leadership of the majority must abide by the rules as promised, and the promises are actually still on the Speaker's Web site but have not been followed as expected.

Let me just read you from the Speaker's own Web site. This is from the Speaker's Web site, as I pulled them off today.

``Every person in America has a right to have his or her voice heard.'' It would have been nice if that had been remembered the last day of our session on August 1 before there was a 5-week vacation. We didn't get to have the microphones on so we could be heard.

But it continues: ``No Member of Congress should be silenced on the floor''--it would have been nice if somebody had noticed that--``as has been the practice of Republican leadership in the United States House of Representatives.'' A little slap there. Anyone smell hypocrisy?

It goes on and says: ``Respectful of both the wishes of the founders, and the expectations of the American people, we offer the following principles for restoring democracy in the `People's House,' guaranteeing that the voices of all the people are heard.''

That just makes me sick to read those words and to think about what's happened in the last year and a half.

Then it goes on. It says: ``Bipartisan administration of the House. Our goal is to restore accountability, honesty and openness at all levels of government. To do so, we will create and enforce rules that demand the highest ethics from every public servant, sever unethical ties between lawmakers and lobbyists, and establish clear standards that prevent the trading of official business for gifts. Honest leadership''--on the speaker's Web site it said--``is not a partisan goal. It is the key to a stronger union.'' I agree.

But it goes on to say: ``We must all work together to put the progress of all Americans ahead of the special interests of the few.'' I certainly agree with that, too.

It goes on and says: ``With honest leadership and open government, America's leaders can once again focus on the urgent needs of the American people.''

How about energy? American people need energy. They need cheaper energy. We need to get off the addiction to foreign oil. They're not addressing that. We took off on a 5-week vacation when the people needed us most.

The Web site goes on and says--this is the Speaker's Web site-- ``bills should be developed following full hearings and open subcommittee and committee markups, with appropriate referrals to other committees. Members should have at least 24 hours to examine a bill prior to consideration at the subcommittee level.''

Boy, that would have been nice last week when we got slapped with an energy bill that didn't go through subcommittee, didn't go through committee, had not one single Republican getting to have any input in that energy bill last week, and it was posted, as I recall, at 9:45 the night before we had to vote on it. It would be nice if these things on the Speaker's Web site were followed.

``Bills should generally come to the floor under a procedure that allows open, full, and fair debate consisting of a full amendment process that grants the minority the right to offer its alternatives, including a substitute.''

How long has it been on a bill of any substance that the minority was given an opportunity to have amendments? Closed rules over and over and over and over.

The Web site goes on to say: ``Members should have at least 24 hours to examine bill and conference report text prior to floor consideration.''

Oh, that's another thing. We don't even have conference reports anymore, because if we had a conference, then there would be Republicans from the House that would be required to get to have input, and that's not going to happen. So the conference reports instead became Democrats getting together, working out in the Senate and the House--though, I think they may have let some Republicans in the Senate throw in a line or two--but nobody from the House. Not fair, not open.

And it says that it ``must be reported before 10 p.m. for a bill to be considered the following day.'' They found a way to completely avoid the conference process so that rule doesn't even matter anymore.

Now, the promises on the Speaker's Web site are so far from what's been happening in this, the most closed-door Congress in history. All I can say is that because of the vast abuses, at some point the majority will change again. Maybe not this year. At some point it will, because the American people begin to notice eventually, and some eventually will be shocked by the broken promises that were never fulfilled.

You can only fool the American people for so long before they figure it out. There may even be consequences for people across the aisle, apparently only for show, being on an energy alternative bill and then having two dozen of those people--it was their bill, and they voted against it, having already acknowledged that was the best bill. Maybe there will be consequences for doing that.

Accountability and fairness also mean that if people are going to use electric or fossil fuel-produced energy they should not try to prevent people who are not as wealthy as they are from being able to have the same opportunities to purchase that fuel on less income, that they would have to allow more to be produced to do that.

It means if you're going to use energy, then allow us to get it in America so it produces American jobs, increases America's gross national product, creates a better standard of living for more Americans. It will stop funding Nations that allow their assets to slip into the hands of those who want to destroy us. You cannot keep sending money abroad and not have a day of accountability when it will come back to haunt and truly hurt us badly.

It's time to quit sending $700 billion a year out of this country for energy that we have. Sure, let's produce the renewables. We have got to go to those for our future. And alternative energy sources would be terrific.

Some of us have come up with innovative things that will allow us to go way into the future with cheap energy, but right now, as my farmers tell me, we can't find a Prius tractor. When electricity was lost for days because of this Hurricane Ike that came through my district, as people pointed out to me, there are no hybrid generators. They run on fossil fuel.

Accountability to strengthen the Nation means that children have to have rules, and that when a man and a woman voluntarily have sexual relations, they have made their choice, and they will be accountable and bear the consequence of igniting a life in this world.

Accountability means that if you're a CEO of a company and you run a corporation into the ground, you should not receive millions of dollars in severance and a thank you for your greedy destruction. Instead, you should have to pay.

So, tonight, I want to close with a motion and a supporting speech made by Benjamin Franklin.

Let me set the stage here.

The American Revolution, you remember the Declaration of Independence, 1776. And then the war went on for 7 years. We got to 1783. The revolution was won. There was a Treaty of Paris, 1783. I did not know until I came to Congress, as a historian, history degree I've got, I didn't know until I saw an original copy in the State Department of the Treaty of Paris of 1783--this was a critical document because this was getting Great Britain to acknowledge in writing that the United States was a country that was and should be free and they would have to recognize that. So they wanted it in the name that even Great Britain would be afraid to break and breach.

I was shocked. It starts with big, bold letters at the top of the Treaty of Paris that forced Great Britain to recognize us; in these big, bold words it says, ``In the name of the most Holy and undivided Trinity.''

Then we had the Articles of Confederation in this country, but they were too loosely woven. There were a number of problems, no common currency; there were problems and haggling between the States. And by 1787, it was very clear that if the Nation was to survive, it was going to have to have a new constitution.

So they went to George Washington and said, we need you to come back to preside. And he said, I did my part as God led me to do and you appointed me to do; I did my part. And they said, You don't understand; the 13 colonies will only come back together if you are willing to preside because they know you, they know your heart, they know you're not in it for yourself; you proved that the day you surrendered all power, as had never been done in the history of the world, surrendered all power and went home; won the revolution, commander of the military. You know, when you do that, historically, you could be called Czar, King, Caesar, whatever you want to be called. George Washington didn't do any of that.

When King George, III heard that Washington might resign after the revolution and just go home, he knew history, he said that would never happen. He said, in his exact words, ``If Washington were to do that, he would be the greatest man alive.'' He probably was.

So then we come to have the Constitutional Convention, with George Washington presiding. They went on for nearly 5 weeks with no success. At that point, Benjamin Franklin was recognized by the President of the Constitutional Convention, George Washington. And Benjamin Franklin rose to his feet and this is what he said--his exact words as recorded by James Madison with help from some of the others there. Benjamin Franklin:

``Mr. President, the small progress we have made after four or five weeks close attendance and continual reasonings with each other--our different sentiments on almost every question, several of the last producing as many noes as ayes, is, methinks, a melancholy proof of the imperfection of the human understanding. We indeed seem to feel our own want of political wisdom, since we have been running about in search of it. We have gone back to ancient history for models of government and examined the different forms of those Republics which having been formed with the seeds of their own dissolution now no longer exist. And we have viewed modern states all around Europe, but find none of their constitutions suitable to our circumstances.

In this situation of this Assembly, groping as it were in the dark to find political truth and scarce able to distinguish it when presented to us, how has it happened, sir, that we have not hitherto once thought of humbly applying to the Father of Lights to illuminate understanding? In the beginning contest with Great Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayer in this room for the Divine protection. Our prayers, sir, were heard, and they were graciously answered.

``All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending Providence in our favor. To that kind of Providence we owe this happy opportunity of consulting in peace on the means of establishing our future national felicity. And have we now forgotten that powerful friend? Or do we imagine that we no longer need His assistance?

``I have lived, sir, a long time. And the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth--that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We have been assured, sir, in the Sacred writing that, ``except the Lord build the House, they labour in vain that build it.'' Firmly believe this; and I also believe that without His concurring aid we shall succeed in this political building no better than the builders of Babel.

``We shall be divided by our little partial local interest, our projects will be confounded, and we ourselves shall become a reproach and bye word down to future ages. And what is worse, mankind may hereafter, from this unfortunate instance, despair of establishing governments by human wisdom and leave it to chance, war and conquest.

``I, therefore, beg leave to move that henceforth prayers employing the assistance of heaven and its blessing on our deliberations be held in the Assembly every morning before we proceed to business, and that one or more of the clergy of this city be requested to officiate at that service.''

According to the record, Mr. Sherman seconded the motion.

Mr. Speaker, that was George Washington's recognition of Benjamin Franklin, and the words I read are verbatim from Benjamin Franklin.

We've begun every day here in this House, here in session with the prayer, just as Franklin moved and requested. There is a higher power; there has to be accountability. Decisions in this body must be made in deference to the Father of Lights, as Benjamin Franklin called Him, and doing so with prayer, and as Franklin prayed, that God will illuminate our understanding.

We are in a perilous time, and it is time for responsibility and accountability, or otherwise, we lose this precious country.

It is time now for the majority leadership to stop playing so fast and loose with the rules and with enforcement of the rules. It is time that, after 2 years in the majority, that promises of opportunity to amend bad Democratic bills be fulfilled. It is time that rules apply to CEOs, to speakers, to committee chairmen, to leaders, and the leaders start leading by example.

George Washington said, back during the revolution, these words: ``A people unused to restraint must be led, they will not be drove.'' He led from the front. When I was in the Army, they taught you to lead from the back. Not Washington, he led from the front. He said, ``A people unused to restraint must be led, they will not be drove.''

As someone pointed out previously, we have the only National Anthem whose first verse ends with a question: Oh say does that star-spangled banner yet wave, o'er the land of the free and the home of the brave? The answer as to whether that banner will yet wave depends on whether this Congress begins to acknowledge some accountability and do the right and the wise thing, not the convenient, not the political thing, do the legal, ethical and moral thing, not the Woodstock thing.

May we get back to following God's directives so that this does not cease to be the land of the free and the home of the brave. May we get back to those things that cause God to pour out his richest blessings.

I thank my dear friend from Georgia for yielding.

This has been a really difficult week. Having spent the weekend with my constituents that were hit by a hurricane in east Texas, and then coming here to Congress and figuring, surely we can put party issues aside because, frankly, when I was in the district, it was around, I don't know, the wee hours, and one sheriff that was helping said, now, you know I'm a Democrat. I said, you know I don't care. It doesn't matter. And then I get back to Washington and that's all it's about. You know, the Democrats have the majority and they were determined to shut out any ideas from the Republicans.

There was a wonderful bipartisan bill, as you pointed out, the Abercrombie/Peterson bill had 38 Democratic cosponsors that understand the importance of energy. Twenty-four of them voted against their own bill when that was made as a substitute.

And it's just incredible how something is being rammed down on the Nation when we can't afford it. People need gasoline. They need diesel. Some of those guys pointed out, they've lost power. There are no hybrid generators, and that's what's keeping about a third of my district going.

Thank you. I know we're running out of time. But one of the comments that was made about Ike, making it so scary, it was a hurricane that was coming in the middle of the night. And when it comes in the middle of the night, it is scarier. And that's exactly what happened with this Democratic energy bill. It was filed at nearly 10:00, and it was a hurricane disaster for this country.

Mr. Speaker, I just came back from a weekend of being with my constituents that were hit by a hurricane. They don't care about Republican or Democrat, and they cannot find a generator that's a hybrid generator. They need help.

And when I went and was dealing with sheriffs that were trying to get help for their people in the middle of the night, one of them said, You know I'm a Democrat. I said, You know I don't care.

People need help in America, and this bill that's been put on the floor will provide none of the above. The litigation has stopped 68 million acres from being drilled, and now once we find that out, we find out that's their ace in the hole to keep this bill from producing anything.

People want hope. People need gasoline. They need diesel. They don't need a joke that is turned into a mean, mean, hurtful bill.

Mr. Speaker, we know that litigation has been stopping all of the attempts at drilling and will continue to do so unless there was something in the bill to end the litigation. So we know that is going to stop it. We know that this bill has an opt-in for States but won't give them a dime of revenue so they are not going to opt in.

So what this has become is akin to what I saw this weekend after the hurricane. On the radio and on the phone people were told that this gas station at such and such location now has gas. People would run down there only to find it was out of gas. That is what this bill does.

Here is energy; people are going to run out, and when they get there, they are going to find out there isn't any.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Dr. David O. Dykes has been pastor of Green Acres Baptist Church for about 17 years while being a true leader, spiritual guide, and dear friend.

In Tyler, Texas, Green Acres has over 14,000 members and is the most mission-minded church anywhere. Recognized this year with the highest award of the Southern Baptist Convention, Brother David, as his church knows him, has taken seriously the admonitions of Jesus to feed His sheep, minister to their needs, and take the Gospel into all the world.

As I heard here from a Florida pastor yesterday, Brother David is truly an inspiration and a blessing because of his evident burden for reaching out to help others. He faithfully serves our church, the local community, our country and world. He dearly loves his amazing wife, Cindy, their daughters Jenni and Laura Grace, and their husbands Jason and Jim. He and Cindy are now the proud grandparents of Lizzi and Caroline. God's love is evident in the life and love of Brother David as today's congressional chaplain.

Madam Speaker, though I am allowed only 1 minute, it would take many times more than that to adequately extol the virtues of this great American pastor.

I thank my friend from Iowa for yielding. Of course, we have had a good bit of discussion on energy. One of the things that has gotten a lot of attention is this moratorium on drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf.

It was interesting to talk to Ralph Regula, a Congressman here, who said he was here in 1981 when the first moratorium got put in place. If you go back to President Jimmy Carter, he signed a declaration stating that the Outer Continental Shelf was such an asset for this Nation that it should be

developed expeditiously. Those were the two words: Developed expeditiously.

So what happened to that? Jimmy Carter saying, Wow, we have got this fantastic resource for oil and natural gas that would help the American people and solve so much of our energy problems. What happened? Well, Ralph explained he was on the committee when there was some wealthy beach front owners, landowners in California, and of course there had been an oil spill around Santa Barbara in California, a bad spill. Amazingly, people complained about the drilling platforms when actually it's the tankers that spilled the stuff bringing it from other places.

But, anyway, wealthy, just the rich, who had beach front property, said they didn't want to look out there and have to see a rig, no matter that it might bring cheaper gasoline or cheaper natural gas prices, which could mean cheaper fertilizer, cheaper foreign products, cheaper plastics, cheaper all kind of things. Never mind about that. The wealthy didn't see that as a problem.

They didn't want to see the rigs out there so they begged and pleaded Congress to give a moratorium so there would be no drilling off the California coast. Well, they were apparently persuasive. They had plenty of resources with which to persuade the Congress. As I understood, it was back in 1981. They persuaded Congress to give them a moratorium.

Well, the recitation was such that then Florida said, Wait a minute. Those of us that are wealthy in Florida that have beach front property, we don't want drilling that might put a rig out there where we could see it off our coast. So never mind that it might provide cheaper gasoline, cheaper products, cheaper heating oil, cheaper things like that. Never mind that. We just don't want to look out from our expensive piece of property and even risk seeing a rig out there. So let's get a moratorium too. California got one. Ralph had warned that if you give California this moratorium, you will rue the day you did it.

Well, the wealthy there were able to persuade no drilling off the Florida coast. They got a moratorium. Before you know it, State after State was able to use and parlay California's and Florida's moratorium into not having drilling off their coast, until we get to the present day, where there's still these moratoriums off most of our coastline that could help our Nation become completely energy independent and say adios to this tremendous transfer of wealth that has been going over to some people that just flat don't like us and some of whom have supported terrorism. So it's important to know your history. In order to know where you're going, know your history.

So when we talk about this moratorium, that is what we are talking about, wealthy folks in the country that didn't want to have to risk seeing a rig, never mind that the rigs could have been required to be far enough off the coast that they could not be seen from the coastline.

In Texas, we didn't have the moratorium. Louisiana didn't. So you can go down, and we did hear the stories that if you put a platform off the coast, then it's going to destroy all the fishing in the Gulf of Mexico. How terrible that would be. Well, they put the platforms out there and, lo and behold, the fish look at it as artificial reefs. Now, if you want to go fishing, a great place to go out is to the artificial reefs, which the fish look at them as, and they are actually just the platform that are producing.

So Carter wanted it developed expeditiously. I had tremendous problems with some of the things he did, like creating the problem in Iran when he cut the legs out from under the Shah and hailed the Ayatollah as a man of peace coming in, and we have been paying the price ever since then.

But here we have a majority that talks about being concerned about what they say is the little guy in America, what I would say are the hardest working people here. I have had union jobs lost in the last few years because natural gas prices were too high. It isn't helpful to keep putting our natural gas off limits. We are losing jobs that good, hardworking union workers should not have to lose to some country where they have got cheaper natural gas.

Also, ANWR, the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It is ridiculous not to drill that small area, compared to the millions of acres that would not be touched, that area where there's no wildlife, the area where there is nothing that would be disturbed, and produce that to bring a million, million and a half barrels on line. And it would not take 10 to 15 years. We have got a pipeline 74 miles away. That oil could be in the pipeline and coming this way in 2 or 3 years.

All of that said, we can then use the revenue, the royalties. People talk about subsidies and this kind of this. Make them pay royalties. The bills that we were pushing in the last Congress for 2 years had significant royalties that would go and be split between the States and the Federal Government. Tremendous revenue enhancers. You have could used that for the renewable energy, you could use that to shore up the hurting infrastructure of this country without raising taxes, and it would be producing new jobs.

One estimate says that if we allow the drilling in ANWR, it would immediately start producing 250,000 jobs, and we'd have 750,000 jobs by the time it was actually completed and the oil started flowing this way. I think solar, I know Boone Pickens is visionary on the idea of wind. That can help us out. But I think ultimately if we get the capacitors to ever store electricity, solar could provide all our power, and this would provide the revenue to get on the way to do that, and we could say goodbye forever to this tremendous gross transfer of wealth to countries, so many of whom don't care for us.

So I appreciate my friend from Iowa yielding. I felt like as a follow-up on this discussion about energy it was very important for people to know the moratorium that will go out of existence come the end of this month, unless something is passed. And I know there are many wealthy people in the Senate, I know that there are millionaires here in the House who are really not bothered by the high gasoline prices. I hope that the Senators that are wealthy will feel and understand the pain of the hardworking Americans and not cut the legs out from under this program that could strengthen America for the next 200 years.

I hope they won't cave in because the hardworking Americans in this country need the help. This is one place we can provide the help.

May God bless this country. One way it can be is if we are allowed to utilize the resources with which we have already been blessed. But thank you to my friend from Iowa for yielding, and I yield back to him.

Mr. Speaker, I do appreciate the work of Chairman Peterson, and I've had numerous conversations with my friend Bart Stupak, and I know that a lot of work has been done on this bill, a lot of efforts have been made because of our concern over unfair and inappropriate speculation. And it is a problem, and it has I think been a contributor to some of the rising prices.

One of the concerns some of us had is what about airlines, like Southwest Airlines, who have been able to hedge against inflation by getting these commodities contracts. And we were advised the Air Transport Association, which Southwest is a member--I don't know for sure that they support--but the Air Transport Association has come out in support of the bill and thinks it will help but it doesn't feel like it goes far enough.

This is something I'm going to vote for, and I appreciate all the hard work by Chairman Peterson and my friend Bart Stupak, but we still come back to the biggest problem on prices being that there has been a tremendous increase in demand, especially through India and China, and we have not had a commensurate increase in the supply.

Supply-and-demand forces are at work. No matter what we do here in Congress, we're not going to decrease the forces of supply and demand on the market. That's what we need to be doing. We need to drill here, drill OCS, drill ANWR, and you know, some people keep saying 10 or 15 years before they'd come on line. The information that I heard was that since there's a pipeline 74 miles from the area of 1002 in ANWR, we could have that coming into the country, to this part of the country, the continental, within 3 years, that we could be bringing in OCS gas and oil in a similar amount of time. That's where we need to go.

I appreciate the work here, and I'm glad you're doing it and I will vote for it. But we need to increase the supply if we're going to help America. That's where the help is required.

General Leave