Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet at 3 p.m. on Monday next, and further, when the House adjourns on that day, it adjourn to meet at 12:30 p.m. on Tuesday, November 1, 2005, for morning hour debate.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate being recognized. I have got a couple of things I wanted to talk about this afternoon as we wind up what has been a very busy week here in Washington. We have had our plate full, and have worked aggressively on issues that are of importance to the American people, and certainly are of importance to my constituents in Tennessee. But over the past week and during this time as we have been plugging away working on the budget for this Nation, working on how we reform government, we have watched a group of Democrats from across the aisle come down here during the evenings, and every evening they talk about everything that they believe the Republican majority is doing that is wrong. They talk about everything that they think is wrong with America, they talk about everything they think is wrong with our employers, and they talk about everything they think is wrong with American families and with the values that we hold dear.

You know, I do not think they think we are doing a thing right. I do not think they think there is much right with America. And if you turn to C-SPAN any given evening, and you see a bunch of people down here complaining, that is them, because they are tuned up, and they are going to it every evening with the negativity and what is wrong, what is wrong.

The left in this Congress does not want to see spending cuts, and they certainly do not want to see tax relief. They are not interested in reducing the size of the Federal Government. They want to grow it. And when they talk about wanting to grow it and add more to it, guess what? They are talking about using American taxpayer money.

It is going to take the money out of your pocket to pay for their want list. And what I cannot help but notice day after day when listening to the left in this body criticize everybody and everything and complain about everything is the tremendous level of self- indignation.

It is the sort of self-righteous indignation that you typically see coming from some of the TV talk show pundits, but lately it seems to be a hallmark of the Democratic House talking points that they are outraged about spending. Their solution is to propose more and more spending, but they are going to tell you they are outraged with the spending. They are going to tell you they are outraged with the deficit. They are going to tell you they are outraged with the debt. But more and more spending, more and more spending, that is what they want.

They are outraged that government failed in the Katrina response. Yet they want to make that inefficient and ineffective bureaucracy bigger and more powerful. At the same time as they are making it bigger and more powerful, guess what, they want to make it more centralized.

They are outraged, absolutely outraged that we have high gas prices, yet they oppose domestic exploration for oil. They oppose refinery construction. They oppose refinery expansion. And this is not something new. This is something that they have been opposing for years. My goodness, some of them even worked with former President Clinton. They are outraged about gas prices, but you know what, I guess they are not outraged that former President Clinton vetoed drilling in ANWR. Now, you know you cannot have it both ways.

They are outraged that Social Security is going to run short of funding, but they do not want to reform it, and they do not want to address that; but they are going to be outraged about it. They are outraged that this war on terror is not over, yet they take every opportunity they can possibly take. They come down here and any time that they can find the time they want to talk about withdrawing from Iraq and appeasing the very world leaders who let the Middle East get away with terrorism for decades before we took a firm stance. But they are going to tell you they are outraged that this war is not over. They have known it is going to be a long war. We have all known that.

Mr. Speaker, I guess they think they have got the market cornered on outrage. Maybe they do. Maybe they do. I mean, it seems that there is nobody around that does outrage better than the Democrats. As my mother used to say when people would get upset, she would look at them and say, Just rave on, rave on. You can talk all day long. That talking is not going to accomplish one thing. Actions will accomplish things.

But, Mr. Speaker, in order to get from outrage to action it takes something to fill in that void and that is called ideas, and ideas is something they just do not have. Now, maybe the outrage makes for great TV ratings on reality shows; but you know what, this is not a TV show. What this is is real life. It is the U.S. House of Representatives. It is a governmental body that works to construct the laws that you and I and my family and your family, everyone lives under; that free enterprise functions under; that we work under each and every day.

But you know, we do not hear ideas coming from the other side when they come down here and claim that we are not doing anything right and that everything is wrong. They are not laying out an alternative agenda because they cannot agree on one. They want to make the government agencies we have got bigger. They want a bigger, more centralized government. They want more Federal control. They want more Federal mandates on local government, and they want your money to come and pay for this.

I hope that my constituents in Tennessee understand this and are listening to this because Federal mandates are something that they are tired of, and I hope that they are listening. I hope the American people realize they want a bigger government. They want to grow it. They want more Federal control on our State and local governments. They want more Federal mandates on local governments, and they want the money out of your pocket to come and pay for it.

They want to make the taxes we have got on the books higher. They want higher taxes. They want higher rates, higher fees, more taxes and in more areas of your life. They are the

elitist of government, and they think that they know better than you know. They want to give the government that too often tramples on your rights more power. That is a game plan. Centralized power for them and less individual freedom for you and for me, for your family. That is their vision.

For 10 years the Republicans have been in the majority here in the House. We have done a lot of good things. We have balanced budgets. We have faced debt which has been brought on by recession and war. We have pushed hard to get an out-of-control Washington bureaucracy under control and to get it reduced. We have enacted major, major tax reform and tax relief for working families. We have put 98 programs up for elimination this year. We have taken a hard-line approach to terrorism. We have gone after the ridiculous regulations, overly burdensome regulations that strangle small business, that keep entrepreneurs from taking an idea that they have and growing that idea and bringing it to fruition, getting capital for that idea, getting that idea into a commodity that goes to market. Those are the regulations that we are addressing and rolling back so that we are freeing up free enterprise.

We have worked to prevent the sort of universal health care plans the left proposes that would destroy the quality of care in this Nation. What do my constituents want to see in health care? Access, access to health care. Physicians in communities, physicians who are able to open their doors and practice. That is what they want to see. Not a one- size-fits-all plan that is directed by some bureaucrat sitting in a building in Washington, D.C. They want a physician in their community. That is what we are working for. Freeing up health care, access to health care.

Mr. Speaker, you will hear a lot of complaints from the left about tax relief. Well, you know, they just absolutely despise tax relief. My constituents seem to appreciate marriage relief, marriage tax relief, child tax credits, sales tax deductibility, lower income tax rates. Goodness, a lot of my constituents even tell me if 10 percent is good enough for God, it ought to be good enough for the government. Let us get that rate down even further, even further. They know better how to spend their money than the Federal Government, and they would like to be keeping it.

You know, one of my colleagues earlier today mentioned something I want to talk about for just a second. Today, despite the war, despite natural disasters, we have seen that in the third quarter of 2005 that our GDP grew at 3.8 percent. And I hope my colleagues are listening and hear this. This year, this quarter, despite a war, despite natural disasters our economy has grown 3.8 percent.

Now, for everybody at home that is a booming economy. That is tremendous growth, and we believe debt reduction requires a booming economy and spending reductions. You grow the economy and you cut back on your spending. You cannot cut the debt without both elements. You have to work it from both sides of the table. Make the tax reductions that are going to allow that economy, the free enterprise sector, to grow; and at the same time when you are looking at the public sector, start reducing what government is spending. It is an amazing thing.

You reduce what you are spending, you increase those revenues, your deficit is reduced and your debt is reduced. Hard as they try, the Democrats in this body cannot make the case with a straight face that raising taxes, which is their platform, raising taxes, raising those taxes on American families, that raising those taxes will increase economic growth. It just does not happen. 3.8 percent growth.

Mr. Speaker, I will have to remind my colleagues also that equals jobs, it equals jobs growth. We have seen over 3 million new jobs in 2 years. We are seeing more. It equals increased small business manufacturing output, small business manufacturing output increases rights here on American soil. It equals a more productive free enterprise.

Well, let me get back to our 10 years of majority here in the House. Last night I watched the left attack those 10 years of work; and as I said, in my opinion we have done a lot of good things in those 10 years and we have suffered some setbacks, and in my opinion we are not done. We have got a lot of good work left that we can do. We are going to continue taking the shackles off free enterprise and freeing it up.

We are going to continue getting government off the backs and out of the pockets of hard-working American families, getting government off the backs and out of the pockets of small business owners all across this great land. We are going to continue working, restoring individual liberty and freedom and hopes and dreams. What you see is a work in progress because there is always room to improve, but our agenda is the right agenda. Yes, we want to see across-the-board spending reductions; the left does not.

We want to see major immigration reform that gets this illegal immigration crisis under control. We want to see border security addressed immediately this year. The left does not. We want to see a very aggressive global war on terrorism that treats terrorists like the murderers that they are. Many on the left do not join us in that desire.

We want to see a tax reform and relief that takes this nightmare of a Tax Code that we have volumes and volumes and volumes and simplifies it so that it is simpler, it is flatter, and it is fairer. The left does not.

Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot of talk about independent commissions around here lately. Well, a lot of the folks in my district are not real happy when they hear talk of independent commissions. They feel like that is our job. They have got people on the left just clamoring for a Katrina Commission. Well, now, I do not know about you, but who needs a commission to tell us that government failed? It seems pretty obvious to me. The city of New Orleans government, the Louisiana government, the Federal Government all failed. Period. I do not need a commission to tell me that.

I would hope that the Democrats do not need an expensive government commission to tell them that either. What I do know and what I believe the left does not know is that failure can be laid right at the doorstep of this massive wasteful bureaucracy that you and I and every American taxpayer is paying for day after day after day. Bigger is not always better. Bigger is not always more responsive.

One of the things we learn is that smaller local governments are generally the ones that are on the frontline, that are more responsive to the needs of communities. That is where the rubber meets the road.

We are paying a lot for this bureaucracy, and we are getting very little in return on our money. What we get is a slow process. We get the runaround. We get less accountability.

The left in this country had control of this House for 40 years prior to the Republican majority, and in that time they created an enormous, huge bureaucracy. Over the past 10 years, we have been trying to reform and reshape that government, to make it more responsive to the American people. As I said, it takes time because they fight us every single step of the way. Every time we try to reduce something, to reform something, to cut back, to pare down, they fight us.

Clearly we have not succeeded enough or the Katrina response would have been better, but I beg to differ when the left criticizes Republicans for this big, ineffective government. If we had our way, if they would join us, we would be looking at companies like FedEx, one of our good Tennessee companies, for ways to reform government for the 21st century. We would be looking at other constituent companies in Tennessee, people like Tractor's Supply Company, efficient small businesses that work well.

The Democrats are more concerned about the jobs, about the jobs big government creates than the jobs small business creates, and they are more concerned about those big government jobs than they are about the effectiveness of government. How dare we ask a Federal agency to pare down? How dare we ask them to reduce their payroll? How dare we ask them to become more effective or more efficient?

I want everyone at home to know that it is Republicans who want a government that is leaner, that is smarter,

that is more responsive. We want to reform government. We want change.

I think there is a philosophical difference between the Democrats and the Republicans. They think government, big government, big buildings, big programs is the hallmark of a great Nation. We Republicans think that great individuals, individuals with freedom and power and hope and opportunity, that is the core and the center of a great Nation.

We want to drag a bureaucracy that is based on 19th-century government into the modern age, drag them kicking and screaming if necessary, because we do not believe big government equals effective government.

There are some core functions our Federal Government should be capable of handling. Defense and disaster response are clearly at the top of the list, and we should not let an outdated system and an overgrown civil service deliver poor service slowly.

In closing, I know that many on the left are going out and slamming our across-the-board spending reductions. They are slamming our budget control ideas. They do not think government has room to cut.

Mr. Speaker, in the 3 years I have been in this Congress, I have sat through oversight hearing after oversight hearing where government agencies have the absolute audacity to tell us that they cannot account for millions of our tax dollars, millions upon billions of dollars, and in the same breath they ask for more funding. Enough.

I want to see reform. I hope this body wants to see reform. I want to see spending reductions, and I want a government that will actually perform its core functions.

Many on the left have been standing in the way of reform. They want to protect the bureaucracy that was built over 40 years of their control. I think it is their monument, and, yes, they will stand here and they will rail against every reform we have ever offered because it is their crowning achievement. It is the monument to themselves and their policies.

But I think it is time for the American people to know that this party and this leadership is focused on the American family. We are focused on families who are strong and productive and free, families who are free, Mr. Speaker, free to dream big dreams, free to have great adventures, to live out those hopes and dreams.

Mr. Speaker, Tennesseans have long been known for giving back more to their community than they take. Jeannette Cantrell Rudy exemplifies our State's proud tradition of contributing to the betterment of both community and country.

This year as Jeanette celebrates her 78th birthday, we should take a moment to recognize her good works and thank her for enriching our lives.

In 1985, Jeanette helped create and fund the Dan Rudy Cancer Center at Saint Thomas Hospital in honor of her husband. With her sisters' help, she honored her parents by founding the Felix A. and Edna L. Cantrell Endowment Fund. The fund has given nurses the opportunity to continue their education at Saint Thomas Hospital. As a former nurse, Jeanette knows just how important nurses are to our quality of life.

It's clear that Jeanette's work has had a tremendous impact on the lives of people across our State. Her life is a testament to the power each of us have to help others.

The list of Jeanette's achievements and interests is a long one. She's a sportswoman, a member of several boards including those serving the Nashville Zoo and Cumberland University. She's even written a book, A Bend in the Cumberland, chronicling the history of her longtime home community in the Pennington Bend area.

It's impossible to capture the many friendships and contributions Jeanette has been responsible for over the years, but we owe her a debt of gratitude for choosing to live in and serve our community. All our best to Jeannette and her family on her 78th birthday.

Mr. Speaker, I rise tonight to say thank you to our leadership, to Speaker Hastert, to Mr. Blunt, to Ms. Pryce, to commend them for working through fiscal responsibility, budget control, for making it a priority and for standing firm as we move forward to reconciliation on the budget for this next fiscal year.

I also want to commend our committee chairmen who are working hard to find the savings that are necessary to reduce what the Federal Government spends. They are holding markups, hearings, working through this process; and they are focused. Our membership is focused.

The committee chairmen are to be commended for that work, and through this process the winners are going to be the American people. We are doing what they want, reining in government spending, being better stewards of their tax dollars. We have got a long way to go in the process. They are the winners. We are cutting back and terminating over 98 programs. These are first steps to economic stability and fiscal responsibility.

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to come before the body and also to talk with the American people a little bit this evening about what we as a House majority are doing.

You know, I have been sitting here for the last few minutes listening to my colleagues talk about their plan and talk about what they were doing. And one of my colleagues was talking about we want this, we want that. I was beginning to think I was listening to one of my children name the Christmas list, got the we-wants.

And I will remind the American people that the we-wants are going to take a lot of your money. And I did not hear one single word mentioned about fiscal responsibility and spending less.

And I would encourage my colleagues to come and work with us, really to work with us on this issue, because we would appreciate having them choose to propose some spending cuts. They have been going through this process of trying to come up with a slogan for 2006.

And it has been interesting to watch them talk about this slogan. I think they are going with something like We Can Do Better, Together We Can Do Better, or something of that nature.

There again, we are not hearing anything about controlling spending and reining in government. I did a cable news show last week with a Member of the Democratic Party. He said, well, you know, they had not been invited to join in working on submitting spending reductions.

Mr. Speaker, if they are waiting for an invitation, I hope they consider this the invitation. It is in that spirit that I wanted to come down to the floor tonight and talk a little bit about the Republican security agenda and invite the Democrats to join us, because we are living in uncertain times. We are facing significant challenges, and the Republican majority has a clear plan on how we move forward on this.

We are focused on our national security, our economic security, our moral security, our retirement security. And we are going to talk a lot. We have been working already, the 108th, 109th Congress, and putting quite a bit of time and energy into continued tax relief, lowering energy costs, working toward affordable health care, and talking about preserving access to health care for all Americans.

You know, I am just going to have to correct one of things that one of my colleagues said. They were talking about Medicaid spending and how we were going to cut Medicaid spending. And I was kind of scratching my head. We have been sitting in the Committee on Energy and Commerce since 3 o'clock on Tuesday afternoon now working on many of these issues.

And all we are talking about doing is slowing the rate of growth of Medicaid from 7.3 percent a year to 7 percent a year.

I think a lot of my constituents in Tennessee have, they have kind of wised up to a lot of this Washington talk, and they know that any time you talk about reining in growth, any time you talk about bureaucrats and having to learn to live with less so that families in houses in communities can keep their money, that you are going to hear talk of a cut. You are going to hear talk of a cut. My people know and understand that.

They also were saying a little bit about energy over there. I have got to make a comment there, too, and they were talking about how glorious the `90s were. We probably would not be talking so much about energy right now if President Clinton had not vetoed drilling in ANWR in 1995. He had the opportunity to do something bold and visionary, and he chose not to. Democrats chose not to. And I think we need to remember that as we talk about energy costs.

When we talk about economic policies and the economic expansion, I think that my young colleague over there might do well to realize Ronald Reagan and his economic policies led to that economic expansion, and we fondly remember that President.

As I said, we are talking about the security agenda. We are focused tonight on the economic security agenda and some of the things that we have been able to accomplish. As I said, spending reductions, we are working on across-the-board cuts, tax relief and tax reform, it has been a big, big part of that. The death tax repeal, marriage penalty relief, reducing marginal rates, all of those things; the child tax credit, marriage penalty relief, our colleagues want to talk all of the time and just say, oh, corporations are not paying their fair share. We need to tax corporations more. And that is all Republicans talk about in tax reform and tax relief. And they are just so wrong.

They are just so wrong on that because thousands of families in my district appreciate having sales tax deductibility. They appreciate having the child tax credit. They appreciate having marriage penalty relief. And so many who have, they are trying to save family farms and small business that they have started, they want to make the death tax repeal permanent.

We are going to continue talking about these as we move forward, and we are going to be continuing to work on these spending issues, because when government is taxing too much and spending too much, you stifle economic activity, and that does affect economic security of this Nation. Republicans are not willing to let government stifle economic activities.

Jobs growth and jobs creation is something that needs to be happening. We have seen 3 million new jobs created. That has happened because of the correct economic steps. It has happened because of a push to reform government. We have 98 programs that are targeted for potential elimination, a good first step there.

Our leadership is to be commended by taking these steps, and this is going to yield $4.3 billion in savings, the budget that we passed. And I will remind my colleagues across the aisle did not get a single Democratic vote on this budget. It reduced $35 billion in savings; $35 billion dollars in that fiscal year 2006 budget, and now we are working to expand that. Not a single Democrat wanted to vote for that, but they wanted to spend more. And when they spend more, that is more money coming out of our taxpayers' pockets.

And, Mr. Speaker, our majority believes that we can do better, and I would certainly hope that our colleagues across the aisle will start to work with us on these spending reductions. We have got a great group of Members who are sick of having the liberals in this body tell us that there is no room to cut, and not a single Democrat has agreed to support even a 1 percent reduction. And they do not believe there is 1 percent of waste, fraud and abuse in government.

In fact, they have opposed our effort to get to that $35 billion in savings. And I think that the people in my district know that you can find 1 percent of waste, fraud and abuse; and they are encouraging us to move forward and go maybe even more, find even greater savings.

I have said many times that I think that government needs to be streamlined, and that it could stop behaving and spending like the overgrown, unproductive behemoth that it has become over 40 years of Democrat control with growing program after program after program, and it could start functioning a lot more like some of our Tennessee companies, maybe FedEx or Comdata or the Tractor Supply Company or any of the hundreds and thousands of small businesses and small business manufacturers that are located across our wonderful Seventh Congressional District.

We have got agencies that spend without results and then do not want to tell us how they spend. We have got program after program that was created during the Great Society, and those programs put very little stock in achieving results. The Republicans in this House are working to reshape that, and we are going to continue putting our focus on spending reduction, reducing a little bit more and a little bit more every single year. And we hope that our Democrat colleagues across the aisle are going to join us and assist us with this.

I am pleased to note also, Mr. Speaker, I will have to note this even though the Democrats do not want to join us with across-the-board spending and reducing even 1 percent out of spending, I am pleased to note that today the President expressed support for taking a look at across-the-board cuts.

I was joined by two of my colleagues, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling), in filing three bills, a 1 percent, a 2 percent, and a 5 percent across-the-board cuts. And also I will have to note that in our work to reduce what the Federal Government spends, Citizens Against Government Waste has sent a letter encouraging Members of Congress to support our across-the-board cuts because they know that as we work toward fiscal responsibility, as we work to achieve and continue economic security in this Nation, a big important part of this is looking at what the Federal Government spends.

Mr. Speaker, I am joined by some of my colleagues tonight. And at this time I would like to recognize one of our colleagues from Texas who is our vice chairman of the Republican Study Committee and has been a leader in looking at the fiscal responsibility of this body and of the Federal Government. The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) has taken a lead on this. He helped with our freshman class as waste, fraud and abuse became our class project. He came forward and helped found the Washington Waste Watchers so that we could begin to get inside these programs to target and look at specifically what was going on in these Federal programs, where the Federal Government spends its money, how it achieves its results.

The gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) has worked on this issue for 3 years. And at this time I would like to yield to him for his comment about spending control and budget control and operations offset, having the Federal Government be accountable to the constituents.

Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, I mentioned that we were working on finding some appropriate levels of spending reduction in our Committee on Energy and Commerce, and I have been called back to this committee.

So at this point I am going to briefly yield the time to the Chair, who will yield it to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) to control our hour of time.

Madam Speaker, while the Democrats are working to develop a message for the upcoming year, Republicans have more than a message. We have an agenda: the security agenda.

We know that Americans have strong views on how this country ought to run, and this Republican majority represents those views. We believe in focusing on four areas: retirement security, homeland security, economic security, and moral security.

We are aggressively fighting terrorism both here at home and abroad to strengthen our national and homeland security. We continue to work to be certain that our seniors are taken care of and provided for in their retirement years. We are working to keep taxes low, regulation light, and shrink the growth of government to be certain that our economic security is not threatened.

Madam Speaker, we want to preserve the right of every American to worship as we choose, defend the sanctity of marriage, and we are fighting to advance the culture of life in order to guard our Nation's moral security.

Madam Speaker, Republicans are focused on these security issues. We know this is an agenda where the American people join us in the actions they would like to see.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California so much for yielding.

The gentleman from California (Chairman Hunter) has done a wonderful job in leading in this war on terror and leading in securing this homeland and homeland security, which is right at the top of concerns of the American people. He is a true leader, and this House is fortunate to have him as chairman of the Committee on Armed Services. This country is fortunate to have his leadership on this issue.

Madam Speaker, over the last few weeks, I have noticed a change in the rhetoric, a troubling trend in the rhetoric. We have heard some of it here tonight, and it really saddens me when those that are opposed to an aggressive war on terror speak as they speak.

Increasingly we are seeing those that oppose the war downplay the importance of the war, or they are trying to minimize the seriousness of the sacrifice that our military is making. I find that very sad.

I do not know what the intent of those comments are. I dare not even venture to think what the intent of those comments might be that we are hearing from the far left in this country, and I certainly hope that they will reconsider those comments, but unfortunately, the message those on the left are sending is that we do not favor an aggressive war on terrorism and that we are not winning.

Madam Speaker, they could not be further from the truth, and I want to say thank you to all of these military families, especially the families whose family members the chairman is going to read those citations tonight, thank them for that sacrifice, thank these moms and dads who are here. They really are on the frontline in homeland security, these moms that are tending to children, the dads that are tending to children, while their spouse is deployed. Right here in this country, they are on the frontline. They are making a tremendous sacrifice, and we appreciate that.

My hope is that some of these families are watching tonight and will hear this, and I want to thank every man and woman who is in uniform, and I want them to know this. We are grateful and so thankful for their courage and their commitment. We believe that what we are doing in Afghanistan and Iraq, Guantanamo Bay and around the world, we believe in it. We believe in this mission, and we do not believe that the work in Iraq is in vain.

I would say this to them: Do not let anyone from the left or the right make you think otherwise. We believe in you. We know it is tough. We all know it is tough. Do we mourn each and every time we lose an American servicemember? Absolutely. It breaks our heart. Are there days when we think the sun will not shine on our mission? Absolutely. But Madam Speaker, we fight through those moments of doubt because we do not want our kids and our grandchildren to ever face another September 11. We do not want our kids to pay the price for inaction, and that is the price they would be called on to pay.

I could stand here and I could read through a list, all of my colleagues could join me in reading through a list, of achievements in Afghanistan and Iraq and not even begin to mention the other Middle Eastern countries, but I am not going to do that. It would take a long time. I could talk about how we are dismantling al Qaeda, piece by piece, every single day. I could talk about the fundamental change we are trying to bring to a region that has spawned terrorism for decades before we responded, but I know my colleagues are going to speak to that.

So I simply want to thank our troops and thank our families. I want to thank the men and women who are serving at Fort Campbell, the 101st Airborne, which is currently deploying. I want to welcome home from Iraq Tennessee's own 278th Regimental Combat Team of the National Guard. They are returning to their families and loved ones this week, and we welcome them.

To the families whose loved ones will not be coming home, you are in our thoughts and our prayers. Your suffering is one we cannot fully comprehend, but your sacrifice is never going to be forgotten. We thank you, we appreciate you, and we pray God will bless you.

Mr. Speaker, Americans are writing us, sending us e- mails, calling us, stopping us at the grocery store and at the high school football game on Friday night, and they are telling us that they want to see us reduce government spending. They support us on the $35 billion in reductions already part of the 2006 budget plan, and they support our effort to begin eliminating 98 programs that have shown little, if any, results.

They appreciate the Speaker of this House making fiscal responsibility a part of his economic agenda, putting that at the heart of our economic security of this Nation. But our constituents do not appreciate that not one Democrat in this House, not one, has stood up to support our effort to get that 2006 budget savings from $35 billion to $50 billion.

Americans do not appreciate that the Democrats are refusing to call for across-the-board cuts. They will not even support a 1 percent reduction, not even 1 percent, Mr. Speaker. If the liberals in this House had their way, we would be spending billions of dollars more every year.

I hope the American people will reach out and let them know that they would like to see Federal spending reduced.

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for his excellent work on this issue. It is a pleasure for me to stand here tonight before this body and before the American people and associate myself with his good work and with his remarks.

Madam Speaker, he was talking about looking at where we are now and going forward. I want to step back for just a moment, if I may. I am going to pick up on a phrase that our colleague from across the aisle had used when he was talking about policies, and he said those chickens are coming home to roost. Well, Madam Speaker, I will have to tell the Members chickens do come home to roost, and the Democrats spent 40 years building program after program after program after program, just layering them up and creating a government that is very expensive. And he is right, after 40 years chickens do come home to roost.

I know that is not the point that he was making there. He was trying to say that in a year or 2 years or 3 years they would come home to roost. But the point is the Democrats controlled this Chamber. They controlled the other Chamber. They had control of the White House, and they kept growing and growing and growing and growing government. And the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) is so right in showing this chart that shows what will happen and what the tax burden will be if we do not take the steps that are necessary to cut back on the spending, and how right he is in the remarks that he has made.

History should be our guide, because 40 years of growing government has left us with many programs that have outlived their usefulness. We have got 234 different economic development programs in the Federal Government. For goodness sakes, would we not be better off with doing some streamlining?

Another comment that was made from across the aisle, as our colleagues were talking, someone mentioned something about impeding tax cuts, doing some things that would impede tax cuts. Well, I hope that the American people hear this because they may want to impede tax cuts. They may want to take more money out of working families' pockets, and what we are doing is trying to put that focus back on having working families keep more of their hard-earned money. And the way we do it is not to take more money out of their pockets. The way we do it is to go in and say government does not have a revenue problem; government has a spending problem.

Now, how do we address this? Step number one, let us look at where we are spending this money and decide, are we getting the appropriate outcome for the money that we are spending. Those are the steps that this majority is working to take in this House. We fully believe that bureaucrats need to be accountable to the taxpayers of this great Nation. And for some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle who are sadly misinformed on this issue, we would love to sit down and visit with them and be certain that they understand this issue.

Tax reductions mean money in American families' pockets. It means control for individuals, and that is something that is very important. We are going to spend a lot of time, as the gentleman from Texas was saying, this week talking about what the steps are going to be that we are going to take to provide tax relief, to provide the right foundation for reducing what the Federal Government spends, to be certain that the Federal Government is prioritizing that budget.

The gentleman from Texas has a great chart, tax relief versus the 5- year Federal budget; and he is right on target with this.

Madam Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding to me.

I want to go back to the chart that he has so appropriately shown, and look what happens here.

In Tennessee, we have a State that is very much like the State of Texas. In Tennessee, we are a small-business, entrepreneurial-oriented state. Small business is our major employer. The largest growing sector of our small business sector is women-owned small businesses. Women are beginning to take the reins, and we have more women creating businesses than any other part of the sector. That is where we are seeing our job growth.

What the chart shows to us is this: On those small businesses, when you lower those tax rates and you give them the opportunity to invest in their business, invest in their communities, invest in those great ideas that make American free enterprise what it is, which is what everybody in the world wants, look what happens. Faith, hope and opportunity come into play. Elbow grease, sweat equity, hard work, it goes to work, and people realize a big part of the American dream, which is owning their own business, and we know that. We realize that.

You lower those rates, you allow people to get in there with lower taxes and less regulation and have their shot at creating the American dream. And look what happens. Your revenues will grow.

Many times, Madam Speaker, and I know the gentleman from Texas has heard this, people have said, well, look, the economy has grown, revenues are up, and guess what? The deficit is lower than expected. It is amazing how free enterprise works. It is amazing how lower taxes work. It is good for this economy, it is good for the American people, because there is more money in their pocket, there is more money to invest in their businesses, and their families have more money to spend on children, on education, on the things that truly are the desires of their heart.

Mr. Speaker, if House liberals had their way, last year we would have spent billions more. I want every taxpayer across America to know that it is this Republican leadership and Republican majority that is talking about spending cuts, spending less, not the Democrats. It is this Republican majority that is talking about continued tax relief for hardworking American families, not the Democrats.

You are going to hear the Democrats say, well, those Republicans, they didn't invite us to come participate in talking about spending cuts, to talk about reducing Federal spending. Mr. Speaker, I hope they will consider this the invitation: Come join us. We would love to have all your input and ideas.

So from this point on, they can stop talking about how we need to spend more and help us find ways to be better stewards and spend less. Let us be frank. The Democrat solution, raising taxes, is not a solution. This government does not have a revenue problem. This government has a spending problem. Mr. Speaker, we invite them to join us.

I thank the gentleman from Georgia who is doing such an extraordinarily wonderful job, Mr. Speaker, as he represents the positions that our party holds on so many issues that are important to the American people.

I am going to be heading to my district for the weekend, as most Members are, spending some time there, having the opportunity to talk with them. But as the gentleman from Georgia was saying, we wanted the opportunity to just address and maybe do a little bit of correcting on some of the points that our colleagues from across the aisle have been saying and stating. Sometimes I think that they are just sadly misinformed on some of these issues.

They said that Republicans are not looking to cut spending. I just find that extraordinary. They said that Democrats are the ones that are wanting to cut spending. Mr. Speaker, the level of hypocrisy in that statement is absolutely astounding. We have a Democratic Party in this House whose message, and I honestly believe many days is the only message that they have, that message is: Spend more. Whatever it is, spend more. Whatever they are wanting to do, if they do not think the outcome is right, go spend more. And for years they have held this thought that if you just put more money in the pot, then the outcome is going to be what they want. Spend more. Spend more.

And what holds them together? Mr. Speaker, I think that is something that is a curiosity to many people, because they are not united on foreign policy, they are not united on winning in Iraq, they are not united on border control issues, they are not united behind working families who tell us repeatedly that what they want is lower taxes, lighter regulation, preserving individual freedom, and having their shot at hope and opportunity.

Our colleagues across the aisle are not united on that. The one thing that they repeatedly seem to be united on is spending more of the taxpayers' money, spending more of your hard-earned money. And it is amazing to me, government never gets enough of the taxpayer money. Government has this huge, voracious appetite for the

taxpayers' money. They just cannot get enough of it. There is always another program. Many of them are great programs, but one of the truths that we all see here in this body: If government moves in to solve a problem, generally neither the private nor not-for-profit sector will move in and address that problem.

So you have additional costs that come about. Every time we talk about winning in Iraq, our friends across the aisle seem to say let us get out, regardless of the sacrifices that are made. Every time we talk about controlling the border, they are over there saying no way.

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, I was on a CNBC program; and a Democrat Member of the House said that their party had never been invited to offer spending cuts. There are 435 Members of this body, and Mr. Speaker, they are waiting for an invitation to come in and participate in how to reduce the size of government. This morning, I was on the floor and I said please consider this the invitation, come on. Everybody needs to work on this. It should be a bipartisan effort. It should involve every single Member of this House, how we go about reducing what the Federal Government spends.

I have three bills that would enact across-the-board cuts, 1 percent, 2 percent and 5 percent cuts; and for all of their talk today about how they want to cut spending, Mr. Speaker, not one single Democrat is on those bills, not one. We have got 14 Republicans who are on those bills, and not one Democrat has signed on to commit to finding 1, 2 or 5 percent of waste, fraud and abuse in government spending.

Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues, who is really leading on this issue? I hear plenty of accusations from the left. I hear plenty of complaining, and I see zero action. A lot of talk, no action. They controlled this body for 40 years; and in that 40 years, they built layer after layer after layer after layer of government. They cooked them a big old government cake, layer upon layer.

We have got programs out there that do nothing but waste our money. We have got 342 different economic development programs. There is a lot of work that we can do. Everyone is invited to come in and work on these issues; and anytime we even try to restrain spending, look at the rhetoric that we hear.

Mr. Speaker, it is our party in this House, it is our leader, the gentleman from Illinois (Speaker Hastert), who truly is leading on this issue, not the minority leader. It is our leaders who are pushing this. It is our party who would like to reduce government spending by billions of dollars, billions more in next year's budget. It is our party that would like to see across-the-board spending reductions.

Their solution that they offer is repealing tax relief that is well deserved by hardworking American families, repealing that relief and raising taxes, period. That is the only thing that unites their party.

I hope that they will work with us on reducing the spending of the Federal Government. I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding.

Madam Speaker, if House liberals had their way, last year we would have spent $7.4 billion more on social programs, and here we are in the middle of a war on terrorism. We are facing new expenses with that war. We are working to rebuild after hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and the Democrats are saying, spend more, spend more.

Madam Speaker, the American people need to know what that means. When they say spend more, it means the American people are going to turn over more of their hard-earned money. Republicans in this House, from our newest Members to our leadership, are talking about how to reduce spending. Democrats are either staying quiet and hoping to avoid this subject or simply ignoring the bottom line and calling for increases in their pet projects. Their leadership consistently fails to do anything but complain and is not endorsing spending reductions.

Enough is enough. If the liberals in this body had their way, right now we would be spending $60 billion more.

Mr. Speaker, this morning Congress Daily ran a story, ``House GOP drops plans for across-the-board spending cuts.'' At first glance, I was disappointed.

I have authored bills with the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Cantor) and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) to offer across-the-board cuts because they work, and I believe we should have the courage to enact them. But I also know that those across the aisle favor massive spending and absolutely cannot stand across-the-board cuts. And while I am disappointed that we will not take that approach of across-the-board cuts, I am not going to give up on seeing major spending reductions.

Mr. Speaker, I believe the House Republican majority is going to find savings in our spending one way or another, despite opposition from the big spenders.

I want to thank the leadership for making it clear that we expect to see $50 billion in entitlement reductions. It is great progress. While Republicans debate how do we reduce spending and get it under control, our friends on the other side of the aisle are debating how much more can we spend.

Mr. Speaker, they are out of touch with America, but they can still join us in this effort.

Mr. Speaker, the Washington Post has done it again for us. They ran an article on the retirement of Turkey's ambassador to the United States, and I was struck by a comment that the ambassador made regarding Iraq and our efforts to reshape that country in the Middle East.

This is what he said: ``Pessimism debilitates you. Don't ignore the facts, but be optimistic. Some of the apparent clumsiness is democracy in the making.'' Democracy in the making.

Mr. Speaker, too many in this body and in the media have fed the pessimism. Those of us standing with the President and our military in Iraq are not playing Pollyanna on this. We know it is going to be a tough, tough endeavor. But we believed and we still believe that failing to act was a poor long-term solution to the fundamental crisis of terrorism that exists in the Middle East.

Today, we should all take a moment and praise our troops, our leadership, and the Iraqi people for voting on a constitution last Saturday. Nearly 63 percent of eligible voters cast a ballot. That is tremendous, and it should be cause for celebration both here and around the world.

Again, to quote the ambassador, ``Pessimism debilitates you.'' Let us celebrate this success.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for his excellent work on this issue.

It is so interesting for me to stand here in this body and listen to people say it was rushed through committee, that we have not given proper thought to this issue.

Mr. Speaker, it seems this issue has been around for about 10 years, trying to get an energy bill through, and we did. We passed the Energy Policy Act of 2005. But this issue has been on the table for 10 years, and if former President Clinton had not vetoed drilling in ANWR in 1995, we might not be standing here having this discussion today. But that happened.

So this is not being rushed through. This is something that is the culmination of a decade's worth of talk. And the people in Tennessee, in my district, are tired of the talk, Mr. Speaker. They are ready for some action. This is a right step. It is the right time.

I want to hit two provisions that are included in this bill. One is streamlining the countless regulations, then helping to prevent some of the frivolous lawsuits. When we look at streamlining some of the process they have to go through to build a refinery, that is a good thing. It is going to help us to be able to move forward on refineries in a more expeditious manner. The other thing is establishing the Department of Energy as the lead agency for siting refineries and eliminating some of the unnecessary requirements on waiting on multiple bureaucracies to respond to a request to build one refinery. This is not about bureaucrats and building. It is about meeting real American needs of real families for energy uses on a daily basis.