Floor Statements

I would like to thank my friend for taking this hour and for calling and asking me to come help with this hour because I, like the gentleman, have been out today talking to some of the people who have come up.

One thing, Mr. Speaker, that the majority have said to me, Please help us. We don't want this.

I had one lady who came to my office today that has a son that has a condition, and they don't have health insurance. It is her and her husband and her son. They get one unemployment check a month. Their son has $800,000 worth of insurance bills today, and she said, I do not want this bill. My son has never been denied health care, good care.

Now there was some people, and the night is late, I had some people who drove for 12, 14, 16 hours. And I had one lady who said that they didn't decide to come up until about 2 o'clock yesterday from Georgia. They left their home at 4 and got here at 4:30 in the morning. It is for them that I think myself and my other colleagues are here tonight, to argue for them, because we are not going to change anybody's mind on the other side of the aisle because we don't have the power to change their mind.

I think what has been demonstrated is that if you have the control, if you have the gavel you can offer the deals, as my colleague from Georgia pointed out about the Cornhusker kickback, the Gator aid, the Louisiana purchase. But we have some Members here in the House that haven't been that expensive of a buy. I mean, we've had people fly on Air Force One that all of a sudden got this idea that they needed to switch their vote. I think they would have made a better decision driving around in Scott Brown's pickup truck, personally, than riding on Air Force One.

We've got people that are changing from a ``no'' to a ``yes'' that may have a job at NASA. I mean, we don't know of all the deals and all the other things. But we do know that evidently that our Members are cheaper than what the Senators were. We do know that. But we don't understand.

And you were talking, my friend from Texas was mentioning why are the insurance companies for this? He mentioned several reasons. Let me give my friend another one. Four hundred thirty-six billion dollars that the Federal Government is going to be paying these insurance companies in subsidies. That's the reason they're for this bill.

I don't know if the gentleman heard our colleagues from the other side of the aisle that had an hour or so tonight talking about all the free things that this bill is going to give, and not realizing I guess that nothing the government ever does is free. And we need to get that straight. I mean, there's not anything free.

I was noticing downstairs they were talking about the tax credit for homes. They said, come in and apply with us and you get a free calculator. I promise you that calculator was costing somebody something. In the free screenings, in the free preventive screenings, in the free medical supplies, those things aren't free.

Those people that we were talking to today out on this lawn and out on the Mall and out on the steps are the ones that's going to be paying for this. The average American and his tax dollars is going to be paying for it. I've got a list here that I've already read once, and am willing to read it again, about all of the costs that's coming with this bill.

Now, if you had listened to our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, you would think that they believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy. And that if they pass this bill all the world's problems are going to be solved, that every problem in the world is going to be solved, and our whole problem is going to be solved.

But if you talk to the medical professionals in this country, they'll tell you it's not going to be solved. They'll tell you that our problems are just beginning. They're going to tell you that they're going to leave their practice. I've got doctors that have told me if this thing passes and goes into effect, I will quit my practice.

I want to thank my friend from Texas for taking this opportunity. This is the last special order there will be before we have the vote, the historic vote, on the government takeover of health care. So I think it is important that we understand that we're talking on behalf of the American people, we're talking on behalf of those individuals that took their time and their energy and spent their hard-earned money for transportation up here. We're up here fighting for them. Hopefully, hopefully, they will continue to fight with us.

Because there's only 178 Republicans. And the only thing bipartisan about this 2,700-page bill that's going to pass is the opposition to it. That's going to be Republican and Democratic opposition. That's going to be the only thing bipartisan about this bill. Everything else is a ram-through by the majority that is going to be paid for by the American taxpayers not just in additional taxes, but by all the sweeteners that we don't even know what has gone on to buy these votes that is going to come about tomorrow night.

I hope that people will continue not to give up on us, not to give up on their self, because we don't need to quit. The vote hasn't been taken yet. And to my friend from Texas, and I know you believe in this, but we need to make sure that everybody is in prayer tonight about the decisions that this body is going to make tomorrow.

With that, I will yield back.

Madam Speaker, I traveled home for the birth of my grandchild. As a result, I missed a number of votes. Had I been present, I would have voted the following:

``Aye'' on Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass the bill to designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 45300 Portola Avenue in Palm Desert, California, as the ``Roy Wilson Post Office.'' (Rollcall No. 128)

``Nay'' on Ordering the Previous Question providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules. (Rollcall No. 129)

``Nay'' on Agreeing to the Resolution providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules. (Rollcall No. 130)

``Aye'' on Motion to Refer the Resolution raising a question of the privileges of the House. (Rollcall No. 131)

``Nay'' on Motion to Table raising a question of the privileges of the House. (Rollcall No. 132)

``Aye'' on Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass, as Amended State Admission Day Recognition Act of 2009. (Rollcall No. 133)

``Nay'' on Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass the Agricultural Credit Act of 2009. (Rollcall No. 134)

``Aye'' on Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to Recognizing the 100th anniversary of the Vermont Long Trail, the oldest long-distance hiking trail in the United States, and congratulating the Green Mountain Club for its century of dedication in developing and maintaining the trail. (Rollcall No. 135)

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to New Mount Calvary Baptist Church in Newnan, Georgia, which is celebrating its 138th year of serving the Lord in our community. In Georgia's 3rd Congressional District, few churches have witnessed the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries, but New Mount Calvary Baptist has attained that distinction. New Mount Calvary has witnessed many seminal events in our nation's history, and it has carried on from the Reconstruction Era to election of our nation's first African-American president.

A church that has kept its doors open for 138 years has blessed its families for generation after generation. The Lord calls on us to gather together as believers in his church to worship Him. The church is where we receive His Word, His blessings and His guidance. We go forth from the church to serve in our respective communities.

The members of New Mount Calvary Baptist Church are rightfully proud of how long they have actively served in their community. I asked the House to join me in congratulating this church on its long, proud record of work in Newnan and in sending best wishes for many more important milestones in the years to come.

Madam Speaker, looks like we may have a mystery worthy of an investigation by Scooby Doo and his gang here. This week, the House may pass a bill to overhaul one-sixth of our economy. But here we are Tuesday, and Scooby and Shaggy are scratching their heads trying to figure out, one, what's in the bill; two, what special backroom deals have been cut, and three, how can Democrats impose on the American people a bill they don't even have the courage to vote on.

Here are our clues. Speaker Pelosi says we're not allowed to see what's in the bill until it passes, and she says ``no one'' wants to vote for the bill that she's forcing through. We know there are special payoffs for States like Nebraska. We know there are political payoffs. We know there are tax hikes and Medicare cuts, and it's not a mystery why the Democrats are going to try to invent a ghostly scheme to pass this terrible bill.

And when the Scooby gang unmasks the ghost, we'll hear the Speaker say, I would have gotten away with it, too, if it weren't for those meddling Americans. Ruh-roh.

Madam Speaker, I would like the Record to reflect my desire to be removed as a cosponsor of H.R. 2499, the Puerto Rico Democracy Act of 2009. Due to H.R. 2499's placement on the Union Calendar, I am unable to officially remove myself from this legislation according to the Rules of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Well, I want to thank the gentleman from Texas for taking this Special Order to come talk about the health care bill that, regardless of what anybody says, is actually being rammed through the process. And the reason it's being rammed through, as I think my friend from Texas mentioned, the American people are not in favor of this health care bill. It also, I believe, is unconstitutional that we're going to require our citizens to buy health care. That should be a choice that every individual makes on whether they buy health care or don't buy health care. They may be in an economic situation to where they don't need it, or they may be young and they may be doing health savings accounts. We need to be promoting the health savings accounts and other ways that young people can do things to provide health care for themselves without their government forcing them to buy a health insurance program.

The other thing that I think is interesting is the unions get a special break out of this. You know, I thought that everything that we did in this body was supposed to be fair to everybody, but what they're doing is they're making a difference in this health care proposal that if you have neighbors living beside one another and one is a union employee and the other is a nonunion employee and they're making the same amount of money, their health benefits are going to be taxed differently. Now, why should that be? I mean, I think that's one of the disservices that has come about through this bill is there is so much inequity between individuals. It all depends on how much money you make, where you live.

There is also going to be a czar that we don't know who that's going to be and we don't really know what his or her full capability is going to be and what they're going to regulate. But I would say to my friend from Texas that they may tell you that the current health care plan that you have that you're happy with does not meet the Federal requirements.

This plan also establishes about 111 new commissions, boards, and agencies that we have no idea what their responsibility or what their rules or what their regulations are going to be and what other type of impact they're going to have on our freedom and our privacy.

The interesting thing is that the leadership continues to talk about how many jobs this is going to create. If it creates any jobs, they will be government jobs. We need to create private sector jobs. We need to be concentrating on the economy. All the political capital that has been spent on health care--and not only on health care, this most open, honest, ethical Congress that we were promised by then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, now Speaker Pelosi, is the fact that they've been tied up with ethics investigations of Congressman Rangel. We've had the tickle wrestling controversy that just came up lately about young people being allowed to be subject to sexual harassment.

Now, we need to be concentrating on jobs. Most of my constituents are calling me saying, look, where are the jobs? You passed a $787 billion stimulus package that was supposed to keep unemployment from going from 8 percent any higher, well, it's at 9.7. The only jobs that have been created have been government jobs. We created about 5,000 jobs with Cash for Clunkers. We have created over 120,000 government jobs since this President has been in office. We need to be concentrating on our economy and on creating jobs from the private sector. We need to be freeing up credit. We need to be making it so small business has an initiative to hire people.

The jobs bill that we passed through here was really a joke. And my friend from Texas, I'm sure you talk to many of your small business people who said,

Congressman, do they really think that I'm going to go out and hire somebody for $30,000 or $35,000 a year to get a $1,000 tax credit? Do they not understand that you can't survive in small business doing something that silly? I said, well, the problem is only about 7 percent of the people in the President's administration have ever even had a private sector job, and I don't know how many or what percentage of that ever created any jobs or actually was responsible for job creation.

What we have got to do is remove the uncertainty that's out there to the small business world, to that employer that is ready to create, to expand, to put infrastructure in our communities. We've got to make sure that he has some certainty. The small business people I talk to go, look, I'm not going to do anything until I have some certainty, and the one thing that the 111th Congress has brought to the American people and to the people that create jobs in this country is uncertainty. They don't know what their energy cost is going to be; they have no idea. Is cap-and-trade going to pass that would raise, just on individuals, energy costs of about $3,200 a year? Is that going to pass? I don't know.

Are we going to raise taxes on the small business people? Are we going to raise taxes on the people who make over $250,000 or over $200,000 or over $150,000? Most of these subchapter S corps that create the jobs are under those individual guidelines.

They ask, Am I going to end up paying more taxes? I don't know.

I can't answer that for you.

What are our health care costs going to be? Are you going to mandate these health care prescriptions on us?

I don't know. I can't answer that.

We don't know about any free trade agreements. This administration has refused to act on free trade agreements. We need to remove the uncertainty for business in this country. We need to crank up our economic engine without starving it for the fuel that it needs to stand and to create those jobs that we so desperately need.

So this health care plan is going to be rammed through regardless of what you say. The rules are going to be adjusted to fit what they need to do. But I've got something to tell the majority: The American people are not that stupid. They understand smoke and mirrors and hocus-pocus when they see it. I promise you they're not just going to hold the majority accountable; they're going to hold every Member of this body and every Member of the body across this Capitol accountable for taking this country in a direction that the majority of people does not want to see it go.

With that, I yield back my time to the gentleman, my friend from Texas.

Well, I don't have anything to add on the constitutionality of the legislation, because I have already expressed I think it is unconstitutional, but I did want to make one comment before I had to go to my friend from Texas.

I believe you said the President had put out an 11-page summary and then had put out a 19-page summary of the 11-page summary, so I wanted to quote from the 19-page summary of the 11-page summary. And anybody within the sound of my voice, Madam Speaker, if they believe this, then they need some help and some counseling.

This is the new affordable choices where the 19-page explanation of the 11-page explanation says, ``paper reduction and simplified forms will begin to reduce costs.''

Anybody that has ever dealt with the government knows they do nothing to reduce paperwork.

``A new Web site to help consumers compare different insurance coverage options, along with State-by-State consumer health care assistance and assistance for any of their health insurance questions.''

To my friend from Texas, you can't call a government agency now and even talk to a real human being, and now they are going to answer questions for 300 million people?

Here is the final one. ``Clear and easy-to-understand insurance documents to help Americans make decisions when shopping for health insurance.''

The government has never had any documents that were clear and simple to understand. The majority of Americans today cannot even fill out their own 1040 personal income tax.

This is a sham, and I hope that the American people will wake up and understand that what is fixing to happen to them is not only unconstitutional, but will be something that will not be easily undone.

Madam Speaker, I attended the grand opening events of the Kia Motors manufacturing facility in West Point, Georgia. As a result, I missed a number of votes. Had I been present, I would have voted the following: ``Nay'' on Agreeing to the Resolution providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2701) to authorize appropriations for FY 2010 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the U.S. Government, the Community Management Account, and the CIA Retirement and Disability System, waiving a requirement of clause 6(a) of rule XIII. (rollcall No. 66);

``aye'' on Motion to Concur in Senate Amendments to Medicare Physician Payment Reform Act. (rollcall No. 67); and

``aye'' on Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree, as Amended, Supporting the goals and ideals of National Urban Crimes Awareness Week (rollcall No. 68).

Madam Speaker, I attended the grand opening events of the Kia Motors manufacturing facility in West Point, Georgia. As a result, I missed a number of votes. Had I been present, I would have voted the following:

Nay on Reyes of Texas Amendment, as Modified on Agreeing to the Amendment to H.R. 2701 (rollcall No. 69)

Aye on Hastings of Florida Amendment, on Agreeing to the Amendment to H.R. 2701 (rollcall No. 70)

Aye on Schauer of Michigan Amendment, on Agreeing to the Amendment to H.R. 2701 (rollcall No. 71)

Aye on Motion to Recommit with Instructions, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (rollcall No. 72)

Nay on Passage, the Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 (rollcall No. 73)

Aye on Motion to Suspend the Rules and Agree to Recognizing the difficult challenges Black veterans faced when returning home after serving in the Armed Forces, their heroic military sacrifices, and their patriotism in fighting for equal rights and for the dignity of a people and a Nation (rollcall No. 74)

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate McCall Butler, a student at Troup County Comprehensive High School, on his selection as a member of the State Student Advisory Council for the 2009-2010 school year. McCall was one of 53 students selected by state schools superintendant Kathy Cox. As a council member he will have the honor of discussing state policies with fellow members as well as with superintendent Cox several times during the school year. He will also have the honor of serving as an ambassador for the superintendent within his school.

The relationship between students and educators that this council facilitates is invaluable for improving and monitoring state policy. ``It gives me a tremendous insight into how state policies and procedures are working in the classroom and it allows me to communicate directly with students in schools throughout Georgia,'' superintendent Cox has said.

McCall is an outstanding Georgia scholar. He is dedicated to giving a voice to the concerns of his school and its vital programs. Upon receiving the honor he commented, ``A big reason for me to apply was because the Career Technical Agriculture Education programs at our school are very important to me, and I want to make sure they have continued funding going toward local, regional and state activities.''

McCall will undoubtedly serve the interests of the students of Georgia and especially his school very well.

We appreciate the service provided by McCall and his fellow members on the State Student Advisory Council. I congratulate McCall on behalf of the people of Georgia's 3rd District and wish him continued success in his academic endeavors.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Rodney Kay, named my State's 2009-10 ``Assistant Principal of the Year'' by the Georgia Association of Secondary School Principals. Rodney, head of Curriculum and Instruction at Heard County High School in Franklin, will represent the Peach State well when he competes for the national title in March.

Rodney won this award after serving as an administrator for only two years. This recognition so early in his career demonstrates the passion and commitment he brings to educating young people. His leadership, combined with the talents of all the fine educators at Heard County High, quickly brought demonstrable results. The school has achieved new records in test scores, and the Governor's Office of Student Achievement named Heard County as one of only nine schools to attain ``platinum'' status in the 2008-09 school year.

Rodney's win was not only well-deserved, but it also had the additional benefit of bringing positive attention to Heard County students' accomplishments, said Principal Rusty Sowell. ``It is a tremendous honor to be selected, and it speaks for itself with the things he has done and helped us achieve,'' Sowell continued.

This success might derive from Rodney's team player approach with teachers. Rodney knows first-hand the challenges as well as the joys that come with serving directly in the classroom. Before his promotion to assistant principal at Heard County, he worked as a Spanish teacher for 13 years in his hometown of Carrollton.

As a Member of Congress, I greatly appreciate efforts to honor the outstanding public servants who dedicate their lives to enlightening the next generation of Americans. Our teachers rank among our greatest resources. They put their own hearts on the line for students facing educational hardships or troubled home lives. They also know the triumph of seeing students learn, overcome obstacles, achieve academic excellence and go on to successful college and professional careers.

Rodney Kay obviously has approached this calling with fervor and passion--and with an eye on a higher purpose. ``I believe I am in the school to serve teachers and students, and I have been placed on this Earth to serve God and others,'' Rodney said.

We appreciate that service from Rodney and his fellow educators. On behalf of the people of Georgia's 3rd District, I congratulate him on this honor and wish him the best of luck as he advances to the next level.

I want to thank the gentleman for yielding and for having this special hour. I did want to comment that we are all supposed to be treated equally in this country. It doesn't matter if you're a mayor, a city councilman, a State representative, a State senator, whatever, whatever you're elected to or appointed to, you should be treated the same as every citizen in this country.

I guess it was back in February of 2009 that President Obama made a statement, and I don't know if the gentleman from Texas has talked about this yet or not, but I think this is what the American people were looking for when they elected President Obama because of what he had said on the campaign trail and what I believe people believed to be the truth. I think he was sincere in saying that there would be hope and change. And I think some of the change that people were counting on was to change politics as usual or how they had perceived politics in Washington. Because as the gentleman from Texas knows, in politics, it doesn't matter what the truth is, it's what the perception is. And right now, as I travel around the country, and I'm sure as the gentleman travels through his State and across the country and even into other lands, we hear that, What's wrong with Washington? Why is it that you've got all these different people being accused of these different things of getting special treatment?

The President said, ``I campaigned on changing Washington and bottom- up politics. I don't want to send a message to the American people that there are two sets of standards, one for the powerful people and one for ordinary folks who are working every day and paying their taxes.''

Now that was a quote from President Obama on February 3, 2009. I'm sure as the gentleman mentioned I think in his previous slide about the IRS employees, these are the employees that are under Secretary Geithner, and what it says is ``willful failure to file any return of tax required under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 on or before the date prescribed therefor (including any extensions) unless such failure is due to reasonable cause and not to willful neglect.''

And we know, from at least the testimony that we've heard, that this was willful neglect, that he had actually been reimbursed this money by the company that he was working for. And so I think it was neglect, and I think this needs to be looked at. I'm not sure what committee or jurisdiction or whatever that this would come through, maybe the gentleman from Texas knows, but this should be something that we demand of somebody that holds an office like Secretary of the Treasury. I have filed for extensions, as I'm sure many people have filed for extensions, and I have never yet had the same treatment or had any constituents that's had the same treatment as the Secretary of the Treasury and while his dealings have been with the Internal Revenue.

I will yield back to the gentleman.

If anybody was watching us tonight, they might think that this is some type of partisan thing that we have. It's not. In fact, it goes well beyond that. In a posting of November 17, 2009, the Huffington Post, which is no conservative posting, had a comment. It said:

``But for his personal tax problems, Tim Geithner would have been a consensus choice of Wall Street for Treasury Secretary last fall. Yet from the outset, Mr. Geithner's appointment compromised the Obama administration-to-be's credibility on ethics. The Treasury Secretary has become a continuing liability for this President.''

So even the most liberal of the blogs and the Web pages understand that this goes against the credibility of what this administration has said about it was going to change Washington. And as the gentleman knows, it's not just this appointment, it was other appointments to where he had to issue waivers of what some of his administration rules or promises were to allow other lobbyists or people to be not only in his Cabinet but appointments of his. I think that it's not just the conservative world or does it have anything to do with partisan politics, I think that everybody, and it seems like especially those that voted for him, are calling Mr. Geithner's credibility into account with the administration.

I think the ultimate bearer of responsibility on this is the President and the administration and I would like to know if he is getting any advice as to why this Secretary is getting special treatment. I just don't think that that's what the American people felt like we were going to get after this last election.

I thank my friend for yielding. Let me just say this; that there were several appointees that the President made after his election and it was discovered that they had tax problems. One former Senator that was looked at for the Health and Human Services Secretary excused himself because he had tax problems. There were other people that had been appointed that had tax problems that excused themselves.

We need to point out, I think, to my friend from Texas that Mr. Geithner's problems were pointed out prior to his approval or confirmation by the Senate.

And so this brings in another whole new question. Is this something that we're going to accept? Is this something that's supposed to be accepted? I just don't think so. I think of our brethren--I think it was a mistake on their part when they knew exactly what had gone on, and they still went ahead with the confirmation process, whereas they should have just continued to ask questions and got more information on this.

But I think it talks about character when the people that were under nomination--I mean, let's face it. It's quite an honor to be nominated to serve in the Cabinet of any President in this country. What an honor. But with that comes some personal responsibility. I think some of these nominees realize that what they were going to be doing was going to be a reflection on the administration. And not just the administration, but the rule of law, as you talked about, and how it affects and applies to everybody.

And so it's with that that I think the gentleman from Texas has done a great job. And I've signed, I think, both of the pieces of legislation, the Rangel rule and the Geithner penalty waiver act. I think that's something that we can do to show the American people

that we want to see some equal treatment. But I just wanted to bring into account this personal responsibility that people have to recognize; that if they have done something wrong or gotten treatment that was unfair, if they just recuse themselves from the nomination.

Isn't it ironic that the chairman of the committee that writes the tax laws and the Secretary who is head of the Treasury, that is really the boss of the IRS, are the two with the tax problems. Mr. Rangel being chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, I felt it was interesting when he admitted that he didn't realize what the law was. I can't remember his exact quote, but basically he didn't realize that he was breaking the law. But from the constituents that have called me, and I don't know about the gentleman, what your calls have been like, they have told me that the Internal Revenue Service tells them that ignorance is no excuse.

That ignorance is no excuse. It doesn't matter if you know that that was a tax law or not. If you don't pay, and if you don't file correctly, you're going to pay penalty and interest.

Now the chairman also made a comment that he got his accountant to figure up what he felt like he owed and send the Internal Revenue a check for that. Now here, again, I have had my constituents tell me that they have never had the IRS tell them, Look, you just figure up what you think you owe us and send us a check and we're all square. They typically send a bill and tell you what you owe them, plus what the penalty is, plus what the interest is.

Now it's up to the taxpayer to prove that they don't owe that. It's not the responsibility of the Internal Revenue to show you why you do owe that tax or why you do owe that penalty or interest. It's up to the taxpayers. It's the taxpayer's responsibility to tell you why you don't. So talking about the double standards. When you find yourself in that situation and you say, Well, I'll get my accountant to figure up what I think that I owe you, and I'll send you a check, and we'll all be square--that doesn't square with the typical taxpayer and how they're treated by the Internal Revenue Service.

So we've got the gentleman that actually writes the laws and the rules that govern the IRS and what our tax code is that said, I don't understand it. But, according to IRS and every other citizen, ignorance is no excuse.

If you would yield for just a minute.

I was going to say that at least Mr. Rangel said that he had forgotten that he owned this property or that this rental income had come in. And so that was his explanation. Mr. Geithner, I don't think, had that same explanation, because if I understand the information correctly and the evidence correctly, he was actually told by that company that he was being paid this additional money to pay those taxes that was due from the money he had received. I'm not sure what the gentleman has got up there.

Is that false swearing?

Isn't that against the law? I think it is in Georgia.

Well, I just want to say this to my friend from Texas, in closing, I appreciate you taking the leadership on this. I know this is not an easy subject for you to broach every week when you come down here, but we have to be serious about this. We are a country of laws, and regardless of whether some people think they can disregard them or not, that's not the way we operate. We all fall victim to this, but I think it's our responsibility to continually point it out and to point the way that we need to be going on this. I just want to tell you how much I appreciate you doing this week in and week out. I feel honored to be able to join you tonight.

Madam Speaker, when President Obama meets tomorrow with South Korean President Lee Myung-bak, I encourage him to express his strong support for the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement.

Deepening the important economic ties between our countries benefits both sides. Already, Georgia does billions of dollars in trade with Korea each year. For Georgians in the 3rd Congressional District, this relationship with Korea has yielded tangible benefits: thousands of good-paying jobs.

Korean automaker Kia has opened up a production facility in West Point, GA, and eventually will employ nearly 2,500 people in a region devastated by textile mill closings over the past 30 years. New jobs are always welcome, but they're a lifesaver for many Georgia families as our State suffers with an unemployment rate above 10 percent.

The plant will have a $6.5 billion economic impact on the local economy, creating up to 20,000 new jobs as a result. Direct Korean investment is bolstering our economy and paying the bills for thousands of families in west Georgia.

Lowering trade barriers between South Korea and the United States will produce more positive outcomes like the Kia plant for communities throughout this nation. Not only will American consumers benefit from cheaper, duty-free products from Korea, but also American businesses will sell more of our products in the Korean market.

In 2007, Georgia businesses exported $397 million worth of goods to Korea. Removing tariffs on U.S. goods, particularly those competing against protected Korean industries, could significantly increase that number. Agriculture remains my State's No. 1 industry and KORUS FTA would eliminate tariffs and barriers to Georgia farm products such as peanuts, poultry and cotton.

Madam Speaker, for my constituents in Georgia's 3rd Congressional District, the KORUS FTA isn't some academic lecture with line graphs. For Georgians, the benefits are tangible and observable. For the people in West Point, GA, Korean economic investment means jobs. Good jobs. Lots of jobs.

The Congress has dragged its feet on passing this trade deal even though we've seen previous agreements work. In the first four years of the U.S.-Singapore FTA, Georgia's exports to Singapore have grown 212 percent. Since NAFTA went into effect in 1994, Georgia's combined exports to Canada and Mexico have increased by 194 percent and since entry into force of the U.S.-Chile Agreement in 2004, the State's exports to Chile have grown 93 percent.

I encourage President Obama to keep these numbers--these numbers that represent real jobs for real Americans--in mind when he shakes hands with President Lee tomorrow.

Mr. Speaker, on this bill the Congress is scheduled to vote on today will cost more than $1.3 trillion over the life of the bill.

It'll expand entitlement spending, it'll raise taxes on small business payrolls, it'll cost jobs by mandating coverage that some businesses can't afford, it'll put government in between the doctor and the patient, and it'll cut Medicare funding. By expanding Medicaid eligibility, the legislation puts new burdens on states that already are struggling to pay their bills. The states share the cost of the Medicaid program, and this could cost my home state $2 billion to $4 billion over the next 10 years. That's a huge share of Georgia's state budget, and it's a cost we simply can't bear.

But, luckily, there is a better way. Republicans are providing that alternative, although the Democrats continue to insist we're not offering ideas. We are. They just don't want Americans to know it.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to call attention to the history of the former Eastern Airlines and its loyal employees. As a member of the U.S. House of Representatives Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Subcommittee on Aviation, this matter is of particular importance to me. I recently met with one of my constituents; Mr. Robert G. Fuhrman of Fayetteville, Georgia, who is a former Eastern pilot; Bob recounted the history of the company and its employees' fight to maintain its reputation for leadership in the airline industry. Additionally, Bob presented me with a copy of his manuscript as well as a number of correspondences to elected officials detailing his experiences, both good and bad, at Eastern Airlines. I have brought these experiences and documents to the attention of the House Aviation Subcommittee so that the Members of the Subcommittee would be aware of the history of Eastern Airlines as well as fulfill my constituent's First Amendment right as outlined in our U.S. Constitution to petition his government for a redress of grievances.

I would like to recount some of the history of Eastern Airlines which had such a profound impact on my home state of Georgia as a hub at Hartsfield--Jackson, Atlanta International Airport.

Eastern Air Transport first emerged on the heels of the Great Depression, operating primarily as an airmail carrier. As air travel grew during the 1950s and 60s, Eastern proved to be a leader in both aviation technology and industry practices. It was the first airline to turn a profit from commercial transportation and the first to successfully implement a shuttle service.

Along with its reputation for excellence in flight, Eastern became respected for its civic and philanthropic contributions. Eddie Rickenbacker, the company's founder and World War I flying ace, oversaw Eastern's participation in U.S. war efforts. In World War II, Eastern served the United States Military by establishing military support flights connecting Florida, Pennsylvania, and Texas. This project eventually led to the creation of the airline's own Military Transport Division. The families of Eastern airlines shared both the drive for success and sense of responsibility its early founder established. Between 1985 and 1986, employees and their families sponsored three ``mercy flights'' to Ethiopia and the Sudan.

Despite the company's early success and innovation, Eastern began to experience financial difficulty. After years of losses, a series of labor disagreements, and the slow accumulation of debt, Eastern filed for bankruptcy in March of 1989. However, the strategic move was not enough to salvage the company, as it was unable to keep up with the expanding market and the demand for cheaper fares. Eastern Airlines finally closed its doors in 1991. While the airline is no longer in operation, the advances its management and employees contributed to the industry are still used by major carriers today. It is of great importance to me that Eastern Airlines and its employees such as my constituent Robert Fuhrman are remembered by the U.S. Congress in a positive light for their contributions to air travel.

Mr. Speaker, if you get dressed in the dark, you are probably going to make some poor clothing choices that will open you to ridicule. Well, the same rule applies when you write bills in the dark.

President Obama said last year that the health care reform negotiations would air on C-SPAN. That way, he said, Americans could see who was fighting for them and who is siding with the special interests.

Based on the President's very own formula, we must assume that the Democrat-only, closed-door dealmaking on health care must have put the special interests at the forefront. It appears certain that one of those special interests at the table behind the closed doors was the trial attorneys. Maybe that is why the negotiations were secret. They can claim attorney-client confidentiality.

But those trial attorneys must have charged by the hour, because the Democrats gave them quite the payoff in this legislation. This bill will override States' malpractice reform laws and it will prevent States from capping attorneys' fees or damage rewards.

Isn't it ironic that it was President Obama who warned us that this would happen.