Floor Statements

Offered By: Mrs. Musgrave

Amendment No. 24: Page 42, line 13, after the dollar

amount, insert ``(reduced by $175,000)''.

Offered By: Mrs. Musgrave

Amendment No. 32: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a true American hero, Jack Carter, who proudly served our country in both the Navy and the Army during both World War II and the Korean war. He then returned home to be a leader in Morgan County, Colorado.

Jack Carter was born in 1925 and joined the Navy in January of 1943, at the age of 17. One of Jack's first assignments was to the fleet Marine Corps as a medic. He made 3 beach landings before he was hit in the stomach with a 25 mm round during the infamous invasion of Guam on February 25, 1944. After 45 days of rest and recuperation he was reassigned to the aircraft carrier USS Ranger, where he remained until his discharge in November 1945.

Jack and his friend Murl Ring re-enlisted 3 years later, this time in the U.S. Army. The two friends managed to stay together and were assigned to the 34th Regiment of the 24th Infantry when the Korean war broke out. The two friends survived when most of the 34th was lost in battle, hiding for 3 days before being rescued. Both men were medics and they were involved in numerous firefights.

Jack received a long list of awards and honors for his incredible service, including the Silver Star, Purple Heart, and 2 Bronze Stars, one with a V for valor, and another for meritorious unit actions against an enemy. Jack was on active duty for 13 years altogether and spent 10 years in the National Guard.

Following his heroic service, Mr. Carter and his wife Dorothy moved to Brush, Colorado, in 1961 with their children Jerald, Paul, Jack and Carol. He has been married to his second wife Alyce for 43 years and they have a wonderful daughter Lauralyn. Four of Jack's 5 children served in the military; Jerold was an Army pilot who lost his life in Vietnam.

Jack worked at the Brush Hospital in both the lab and the x-ray department. Jack is well known in Morgan County for organizing the Morgan County Ambulance Service in 1967. He organized the meetings, trainings and helped establish bylaws and procedures. This volunteer system has been in place until fairly recently. Jack was honored as the Optimist Citizen of the Year in 1969 and later became the first Brush Optimist Club President.

Madam Speaker, we are so fortunate to live in this great country where freedom is something that we rarely have to think about and often take for granted. It is simply a way of life for us, and we are truly blessed to live in a country whose citizens willingly volunteer to put themselves in harm's way to defend and protect our great Nation.

I am proud to honor Jack for his dedicated service to our Nation. Jack is a hero who left his home to defend our Nation, and then returned home to be a valued member of his community, showing his children and grandchildren how to live meaningful lives of service. Jack truly is the embodiment of all the values that have molded America into the great nation it is today. May God bless Jack and his family, may God bless our precious veterans, and may God bless America.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to speak on behalf of H.R. 2570, to designate the post office building at 301 Boardwalk Drive in Fort Collins, Colorado, as the Dr. Karl E. Carson Post Office Building.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity to honor a man who has given so much to the Fort Collins community. He was quoted in 2005 saying that he lived life by a simple pledge: ``I hope when I leave this place, I contributed to making it a better place.''

His legacy in Fort Collins was indeed a life of community service and devotion to his family. Dr. Carson passed away in February of this year, and I think it would be safe to say that Fort Collins was a better place because of Dr. Carson's service to this community.

Karl was born on September 27, 1915, in Wichita, Kansas, to Daniel and Clara Helfrick Carson. He was raised on the family dairy farm, and every day before he went to school he milked cows and bottled milk. In high school, he met his lifelong sweetheart, Wilma Schull, and they married on August 23, 1936. To this union, five children were born: Allen, James, Daniel, Thomas and LuAnn. The Carsons also had eight grandchildren and four great grandchildren.

Karl Carson attended Fort Hays State University in Kansas on a music scholarship, and he paid his way through college by singing at weddings and parties.

He served in the United States Navy Reserve during World War II. He was a communication officer on the USS Strive, a mine sweeper.

Following his military service, Mr. Carson attended the University of Nebraska and received his Doctor of Dental Surgery degree in 1951. The Carson family moved to Fort Collins where Dr. Carson started his dental practice in

1954. His practice thrived and continued until retirement in 1994. Amazingly, for 30 of those 43 years he practiced dentistry with his son, Tom. In 1991, the Colorado Dental Association gave him its Distinguished Service Award.

Dr. Carson was a member of the Fort Collins City Council from 1965 to 1973. He held the city's top post, mayor, for five terms, from 1968 to 1973 at a time when the city council elected the mayor. And he considered his support of adding fluoride to the Fort Collins water supply one of his greatest achievements. During his tenure, he started a program called Designing Tomorrow Today, which led to the construction of the Lincoln Center, city hall, and the downtown library.

Dr. Carson's community service is legendary. He was the director of downtown Fort Collins development, President of the Colorado Municipal League and the Colorado League of Cities. He was also a member of Kiwanis since 1938. Continuing his love of music and youth, he lent his expertise to participants in the Kiwanis annual Stars of Tomorrow Talent Show.

Madam Speaker, Dr. Karl Carson indeed fulfilled his legacy of leaving Fort Collins and this world a better place. The citizens of Fort Collins, Colorado, will never forget him. He was a man of love and commitment to his family and community. Upon hearing of his death in February of this year, the current mayor of Fort Collins, Doug Hutchinson, called Dr. Carson a ``City Father.''

I urge my colleagues to join me in recognizing Dr. Karl Carson for his many contributions to the Fort Collins community by supporting this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Retired Army Col. Bill Gordon of Fort Collins, Colorado.

Later today Colonel Gordon will receive the National Order of the Legion of Honor from the Government of France in recognition of his distinguished record of military service in France during World War II. The Legion of Honor is the highest honor conferred upon French citizens and foreign nationals by the French Government.

After playing on UCLA's first football team to compete in the Rose Bowl, Bill Gordon was commissioned through UCLA's Army ROTC Program in 1943. Following the 1944 D-Day invasion, Lieutenant Gordon was assigned as a replacement platoon leader in B Company of the 82nd Airborne Division's 507th Regiment.

In December 1944, the 507th was assigned to an area along the Meuse River just east of Nouzonville, France, to meet the onslaught of a German surprise attack in the Ardennes. After the Battle of the Bulge, Lieutenant Gordon was seriously injured during a parachute jump near the important German industrial City of Essen.

After the war Lieutenant Gordon was placed on reserve status in 1946, but was reappointed to the regular Army in 1949. Over the course of his 30-year career in the Army, Colonel Gordon served in both Korea and Vietnam. Among his many decorations are the Distinguished Service Medal, two Silver Stars, the Legion of Merit, the Bronze Star with V, two Purple Hearts, 14 Air Medals with V, and the Defense Meritorious Service Medal.

Following his distinguished military career, Colonel Gordon and his family settled in Fort Collins, Colorado, where he served as Director of the Larimer County Emergency Management System and as Larimer County Administrator.

The sacrifices he made to ensure the liberty and freedom of future generations will never be forgotten.

Madam Speaker, like so many other young members of this Greatest Generation, Colonel Gordon set aside his ambitions and risked his life to ensure the continued freedom of our great nation. I am both humbled by his selflessness and incredibly proud of his heroic patriotism. As he receives recognition today from

the Government of France, I urge my colleagues in this House to join me in extending our gratitude to Colonel Bill Gordon.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment to the Financial Services appropriations bill today would make a cut of just one-half of 1 percent in the overall funding of the bill.

Again, when I walk around the Halls of Congress, and I see signs on easels by Blue Dog Democrat doors and other individuals, it is pointed out to anyone that walks by that our national debt now is at $8.8 trillion.

I offer this amendment in the tradition of our former colleague, Joel Hefley from Colorado, who faithfully came to the floor on these appropriations bills and offered a 1 percent cut, just a 1 percent cut in our spending.

Government does not have a revenue problem. What we have is a spending problem.

You know, when I listen to my colleagues, my friends on the other side of the aisle, and heard the esteemed chairman of the Appropriations Committee talk, he said something, if we cut our spending, we would have, I believe his term was, exactly this, runaway rugged individualism.

You know, as we approach the 4th of July and this holiday that's coming up, the celebration of the Declaration of Independence, I think about what has made this country great. I think one of the main things that has made this country great is rugged individualism.

What you have here is two opinions, two views of what makes this country great, and what the role of government should be.

I don't think there are many Americans, when they really think about it, wanting the government to advise them on how to buy a car and how to make decisions for themselves. I think Americans can take care of these things themselves. But will we have a bill like this when we have a 9.8 percent increase in spending over last year's amount? That's $1.9 billion.

I wonder if the taxpayers think that they need to spend money in these kinds of ways. One of the things that caught my eye was a $550 million increase in funding for the IRS. That's a 5 percent increase over last year's budget figure. There's not too many of us that would want to go home and brag about that.

So I think that we need to tighten our belt. I think we need to think about the proper role of government, what government should really do, strong national defense, our roads and our infrastructure, and wonder how government got involved in all of this and why, in this year's appropriations bill, we have to increase spending by $1.9 billion.

My amendment would humbly take it from a 9.8 percent increase in spending to 9.3 percent.

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

Mr. Chairman, I recognize the gentlelady for Minnesota (Mrs. Bachmann) for as much time as she may consume.

Could I ask the chairman how much time remains for either side?

Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 1\1/2\ minutes to our distinguished deputy whip from Virginia.

Mr. Chairman, I would ask the chairman of the committee if he has any more speakers.

I would yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).

I would like to yield to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Walberg) for the remainder of the time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment would reduce the overall funding of this bill by .5 percent, one-half of 1 percent. We already know that the increased funding in this bill over the last year's appropriations is an additional $1.2 billion, 4.5 percent. So my amendment would take a 4.5 percent increase to a 4 percent increase. That is not a cut. If you look up the word ``cut'' in the dictionary, this is still an increase in spending of 4 percent.

We have a national debt that is at an all-time high, $8.8 trillion. I walk around in the Longworth House Office Building where my office is and I see these charts on easels out in front of Members' offices and they are decrying the national debt. I look at my children and my grandchildren and I am very concerned about this $8.8 trillion. I think we are leaving a terrible legacy to our children and our grandchildren. I hear my friends on the other side of the aisle, and I want to say that you are right when you decry the spending levels that the Republicans reached while we were in the majority.

But I want to take it back to a time when I was a teacher, and someone in the class would do something and you would try to correct this student and they would say, But he is doing it too. And you would say, It is still wrong. You are doing it. You stop it. And then you deal with this person over here.

Republicans spent too much. Democrats want to spend even more, Mr. Chairman. But as we are standing here today debating these amendments, and some people think we need to hurry up and go home, I think the American people need to hear this debate.

I heard the distinguished chairman talking about a meat-ax approach that a Republican chairman had alluded to before years ago. I would say that the Musgrave amendment is just a shave, Mr. Chairman. It is a shave that won't even give you a rash. It is 50 cents on $100. That is very appropriate.

When we look at this bill, we hear things that are very worthy of taxpayer spending in this bill. But we also hear other things.

This bill contains $204 million for land acquisition. If you take a map of the United States, Mr. Chairman, and you look and see how much land the government already owns west of the Mississippi, if you look at that map, it is staggering. I am very concerned about how the Federal Government already owns too much land.

Again, in this bill there is $204 million for land acquisition. I have friends in the Western Caucus, and I am a member of it, and we talk about what happens to communities when this property is owned by the Federal Government, what happens to the revenue stream.

This bill also has something else that is especially egregious to me, $160 million in funding for the National Endowment for the Arts, a 29 percent increase over the amount that was appropriated last year. I love the arts and I know that these things are noble. But, do you know what? When I talk to a family in Sterling, Colorado, a farming community out there in northeastern Colorado, I would have a very hard time convincing them that they need to be taxed at a higher rate, to send their hard-earned dollars to Washington, D.C. so that money can be handed out for theater productions in Sitka, Alaska. I don't think the family in Sterling, Colorado, would get that.

So I think when we talk about the good things in this bill, we also have to look at these egregious things and talk about choices we should make.

So again, I want to trim this. I want to give this a shave of one- half of 1 percent, which, by the way, in dollar amounts, ends up being $138 million, just a shave off of this bill, to exercise discipline in our spending just like the families back home have to do to meet their budgets.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Jordan).

Mr. Chairman, I would like to give my friend from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett) 2 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, I would ask the committee chairman if he has any more speakers.

Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining for both sides.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Campbell).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my colleague from Georgia (Mr. Price).

Mr. Chairman, as I think about this amendment again, I have heard from the distinguished chairman, and I do applaud his work and the work of the ranking member on this appropriations bill, but I heard, I believe it was Representative Contee talk about a meat-ax approach to reducing spending.

I would just like to say again that this .5 percent is just a gentle shave. We need to look at the trajectory when we look at appropriations bills and see where they are going. We need to ask the American family, are you guaranteed a 4.5 percent increase in your income every year?

I think we need to think of that American family, particularly moms and dads with children that are trying to figure out how long they are going to have to work in the year before they reach tax freedom day. How many days do they have to work before they have earned enough money to pay the government to spend like this with increases every year?

I am hoping we can look out for the American taxpayer, we can look out for hard-working Americans and say we are going to exercise fiscal responsibility, and we are going to start out with a very small step, reducing spending in this Interior appropriations bill by .5 percent.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Offered By: Mrs. Musgrave

Amendment No. 12: Page 146, after line 22, insert the

following:

Offered By: Mrs. Musgrave

Amendment No 13: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Offered By: Mrs. Musgrave

Amendment No. 27: Page 110, after line 18, insert the

following new section:

Sec. 417. Each amount appropriated or otherwise made

available by this Act that is not required to be appropriated

or otherwise made available by a provision of law is hereby

reduced by 0.5 percent.

Mr. Chairman, as we are debating this, I think that one thing we have to be mindful of is every Member of Congress knows what an in-kind contribution is. And I would just like to say that we know that we have to account for in-kind contributions and we have to consider this in the Lowey amendment.

I oppose this because I really feel that we need to protect the international family planning integrity. We know what the Mexico City policy was put in effect to do. We know that people in this country do not want their taxpayer dollars used to provide for abortion as a means of family planning.

Another thing that has not been brought into this debate is this amendment really is a poison pill. I think that it undermines the Mexico City

policy, and I think that it could possibly subject this bill to a veto. And I think we need to be very mindful of that as we engage in this debate.

And we need to be mindful that this amendment doesn't increase USAID funding for contraceptives. It simply diverts contraceptive commodities from organizations that do not promote or provide abortions as a method of family planning.

So I rise in opposition to the Lowey amendment. I understand the intention. But, again, we all know what an in-kind contribution does, and we know what it does to the budgets of those organizations that promote abortion as a method of family planning.

The Smith-Stupak amendment is the only amendment that removes the poison pill, restores the Mexico City policy, and allows the USAID to continue to direct the U.S. family-planning resources to organizations that are not engaged in pro-abortion activities.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Smith-Stupak amendment.

I believe women in developing nations, these poor women are not asking help to abort their children. They are asking for help with food, housing and medical care for them and their families. It costs roughly $5 to spray a house with the cheapest insecticide to protect entire families from being infected with malaria.

The drug Nevirapine reduces the risk of prenatal HIV infection by 50 percent. One dose is given to the mother and one to the baby, and these two doses only cost $5.

Mr. Chairman, I believe this is how our foreign aid dollars should be spent, saving lives, not destroying them. Most preventable child deaths are from malnutrition, diarrhea, pneumonia, infections of newborns and malaria.

The United States has contributed more than $1.5 billion in the last 5 years to treat almost 5 billion episodes of child diarrhea with lifesaving oral rehydration therapy, and we have reduced deaths from diarrheal disease by more than half since 1990.

These are the success stories of how U.S. tax dollars are saving lives, and we need to continue to preserve lives. The money in this bill should be spent on newborn care programs and not on destructive abortion procedures destroying the life of the child and harming women.

I believe we need to export lifesaving policy that provides poor women with the food, with the housing and the medicine that they need so desperately.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, this debate has gotten very interesting. There are some of us in the Chamber, Mr. Chairman, that have been concerned about fiscal discipline for a long time. We have been called things like budget hawks. Mr. Chairman, we were willing to take on our own party on that issue and we were also willing to take on our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, because, Mr. Chairman, when I think about this debate tonight and I think about the national debt being over $8.8 trillion, you know, I would have to think that there are people around this Nation tonight watching this debate and wondering why in the world Congress, and there have been many mistakes in the past, why Congress can't get serious about the way we spend taxpayers' dollars.

My amendment would offer an across-the-board cut. And I know that has been criticized by my friends on the other side of the aisle, but, you know, sometimes an across-the-board cut makes a lot of sense. And I am interested to think about spending levels where we cannot cut 50 cents out of each $100 that we spend.

I offered an amendment that was not accepted in the unanimous consent agreement that would have highlighted one of the more egregious forms of waste and abuse of the funding in this bill, and this was an article in the Boston Globe that I read, and they broke a story last February about the former executive director of the Global Fund and how he used Global Fund dollars. I want to tell you what the Global Fund is supposed to do. It's an organization that is supposed to combat global diseases like AIDS and malaria and tuberculosis.

Let me tell you how he spent our American tax dollars. He spent between $91 and $930 a day for limousines in London and Paris and Washington and San Francisco, averaging almost $400 a day for limousines. He spent $1,695 for a dinner for 12 at the United States Senate Dining Room here at the Capitol. Then he spent $8,780 for a boat cruise on Lake Geneva in Switzerland; $8,436 for a dinner in Davos, Switzerland; and then they had champagne and expensive meals. I wonder if the American taxpayer thinks that this is frivolous nonsense. You know they do. They would be outraged to think that they get up, go to work every day, work for their children, work to pay for their home, work to buy the college education for those kids that they dream of, and people are spending their tax dollars like this.

You know, I think an across-the-board cut sounds great. I would like a larger one, but I'm asking for a modest half of 1 percent, 50 cents out of $100. You know, when you look at your children and you look at your grandchildren, Mr. Chairman, and you think about that debt, and I don't care who you want to blame it on, Republicans, Democrats, Republican Presidents, Democrat President, we at this time in history have an opportunity to be responsible with the American taxpayers' dollars and cut this increase in this budget from 9.5 percent to 9.

I ask my colleagues to support this amendment.

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

Mr. Chairman, I would like to correct a statement I made. I referred to a cut.

My amendment would take a 9.5 percent increase in funding in this bill over the last one to a 9 percent increase.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Indiana.

(Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

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

Mr. Chairman, I would like to make it perfectly clear that if you had read the amendment you would see that no assistance to Israel is cut. We have common enemies, we have common values, and I am a strong supporter of Israel.

If the gentleman who just made the remarks would look at the amendment, he would see there are no cuts to Israel.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Culberson).

Mr. Chairman, may I inquire as to how much time is remaining?

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my friend from Texas (Mr. Conaway).

Mr. Chairman, some people would not call it a hoax if we save 50 cents on every $100 dollars that we spend, that the hardworking taxpayers of this country have provided for us.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to my friend from Georgia (Mr. Westmoreland).

I would like to recognize the ranking member.

Mr. Chairman, tonight I again am amazed that our President's numbers have been so highly esteemed by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. And I don't believe I've ever heard a debate where so

much Scripture was quoted by the folks that constantly talk about the separation of church and state. So it's been quite an amazing evening here.

When the American people see all this, perhaps their heads spin as we talk about all these things, and maybe they don't understand everything we say because we're in this political arena. We're serving in Congress. And they're working hard every day trying to provide for their families.

But I think what the American people would understand, Mr. Chairman, I have 2 quarters in this hand. This is 50 cents. In this other hand I have a dollar bill, a $100 bill. The American people know that government spends too much money. All I'm asking for in this amendment is for us not to spend this 50 cents.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. Chairman, my amendment would eliminate funding for the Denali Commission. This amendment would save taxpayers $1.8 million.

In fiscal year 2007, the Denali Commission received $49.5 million. The President's request in this fiscal year for 2008 is $1.8 million and the bill provides that entire amount.

When we look at the State of Alaska, it has a very low tax burden. Alaska has no State income tax. It has the

lowest taxes as a percentage of per capita income of any State in the country. Also, Alaska is actually a relatively wealthy State in terms of per capita income.

I yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

Reclaiming my time, I thank both the gentlemen and look forward to our efforts to save the American taxpayers $1.8 million.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

My amendment would cut one-half of 1 percent spending from the Energy and Water appropriations bill. I am offering this amendment to this bill to make a cut of just one-half percent of the overall funding of the bill.

With the national debt at an all-time high, Mr. Chairman, of $8.8 trillion, Congress is leaving a very sad legacy for the next generation. I believe that we in Congress must take responsibility for this burden by establishing Federal spending priorities and setting spending caps for some programs and eliminating unnecessary spending for others. When you look at this amount of money, when you look at this huge amount that we are spending, I believe that it is very reasonable to ask for this modest cut. We owe it to the taxpayers whose money we are spending to make a serious commitment to fiscal responsibility and we need to exercise fiscal restraint.

The simple truth is that the money we stand here today to spend is not our own. The funds that we are appropriating come from the hard- earned incomes of families across this country. The families in my district in eastern Colorado need money for groceries, to buy gas for their cars, to educate their children, and I think that when we are here on this floor talking about this issue, we ought to think about the families in Colorado and around the Nation that work very hard to make ends meet.

I know that there are worthy programs in this bill and I commend the work of the chairman and the ranking member, but I think we need to realize that this fiscal responsibility is what we should be exercising right now. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment and really to demonstrate to the American public that we remember where this money comes from as we spend it and make our decisions here in this Chamber.

Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Offered By: Mrs. Musgrave

Amendment No. 48: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following new section:

Sec. 699D. Each amount appropriated or otherwise made

available by this Act that is not required to be appropriated

or otherwise made available by a provision of law is hereby

reduced by 0.5 percent.

Offered By: Mrs. Musgrave

Amendment No. 55: Page 51, line 18, after the dollar

amount, insert ``(reduced by $175,000)''.