Floor Statements

I thank you very much for those kind remarks, and, again, what an honor and a privilege to be here on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives representing Alabama's Second District, but also here just to embrace the very quote that you began with: All great change in America begins at the dinner table, from President Ronald Reagan.

As I sit here, and I've been listening to my colleagues, I can't help but reflect back on my time as a child around the dinner table with my parents and my siblings. I am so grateful for the parents that I have that encouraged debate, yet taught me the responsibility that I have as an American and as an individual. Certainly I credit my wonderful parents for the opportunities that I've had to lead me to this place today to have the privilege and honor of representing Alabama's Second District.

This week, this Congress is embarking on a historical path. We all understand the responsibility that we have, and each of us brings to the table a unique sense. As women, as those who pump gas and go to the grocery store and see the rising costs of milk, we bring a perspective to this Congress that I think is vitally important to demonstrate exactly where this country is now. The people that are having to make the choice between whether they're putting food on their table or gas in their car so that they can get to their job to provide for their family. So again, thank you for letting me be a part of this.

All of us that are here on the floor today, since the day we walked in, particularly this past January, we have been fighting to tighten the government's belt. Every American has done so in the past several years, and it's time that this Federal Government did the same. We did it with the continuing resolution. We did it with the House budget resolution, and we've been doing it throughout the appropriations process, and we have done it this week.

Our children, my children, my children's children, they deserve a future free of crushing taxes so that they have the same opportunity that I mentioned that I had before. They deserve to be free from a life of indebtedness to China.

The Cut, Cap, and Balance Act ensures that we fulfill our constitutional obligation to pay our debts. We're at a place right now, you and I could never call up our credit card company and say, hey, credit card company I've maxed out my card. I don't have any cash to pay you the interest on what I already owe, so could you just increase my credit limit? Can you imagine? Can you imagine going to your husband and saying, I maxed out, but I need a little bit more so I'm just going to call the credit card company. That's exactly what's going on here. And if we don't insist, just like you and I would in our home, just like our spouses would, just like we would for our children, if we do not insist that there are significant spending reforms where we cut up that credit card and say no more--your child wouldn't change his or her behavior if you just continued to give them more; nor would you change your behavior if your credit card company allowed that kind of action. We should require the same of our Federal Government as we do in our home.

It is so urgent that we provide the American people with honest, honest solutions, and I believe that we have demonstrated that this week. I look forward to the next coming weeks as we can do all that we can, as Republican women, to help turn this tide of spending in this country so that we can save this country for the next generation. It cannot be about the next election. It must be about the next generation.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of my Special Order regarding the debt and jobs.

Mr. Speaker, I am joined here tonight by Members of the freshman class once again to focus this discussion on jobs, and I immediately had just one glaring road sign in my mind as I sat here and listened to the Democrats talk about their so-called plan, ``Make It In America,'' and it's ``stop,'' s-t-o-p. This has to stop. The American people deserve the truth. And what you just listened to, what was just presented to you is not that.

We have got to focus in and look at--which we're going to do tonight in a very good discussion--this job-killing legislation that has been presented by the very side that just stood up and told the American people that we're out to kill Medicare and so on and so forth. People can't make it in America right now because of the heavy hand of government that is bearing down on them, because of this job-killing legislation and overreaching regulation that continues to be promoted by the other side. And we've had enough. So let's stop. Let's stop the demagoguery. Let's get down to the truth. We're going to have that discussion here tonight.

The average unemployed American has been searching for a job for 39 weeks, the longest average time in history to be looking for a job. Twenty-one million jobs are still needed by 2020 to return our Nation to a full job recovery. Companies in the United States of America are hitting the brakes on hiring and production.

I want to start our discussion here and I want to hit on three points. I am going to talk very quickly about health care, about boiler MACT, and about energy and jobs. And that's going to lead for the discussion here tonight.

On May 19, a small business owner received documents from his insurance carrier stating that, due to ObamaCare the coverage in his policy would be updated with the new terms of the law on the anniversary of his enrollment. Four days later, this small business

owner received a statement from the same insurance carrier stating that his monthly premium would increase by 25 percent. And I have those documents here with me tonight.

Why does the administration continue to state that Americans will not see significant increases in their health care coverage when it is already happening right now?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to submit these documents into the Congressional Record.

CareFirst

BlueCross BlueShield,

Washington, D.C., May 23, 2011.

Dear Member: the purpose of this letter is to inform you of

your premium rate for the upcoming year. Please take a moment

to review this important information.

Your current monthly premium is $174.00. Beginning 08/01/

2011, your monthly premium will change to $218.00. Please

note that this is a change in your monthly rate.

We regret this increase is necessary, but it reflects the

cost of providing you the coverage called for in your policy.

As a not for profit organization, we operate on the smallest

possible margins, consistent with financial soundness.

Our service hours are Monday - Friday from 7:00 am - 7:00

pm. So that we may serve you as quickly as possible, please

have your ID card available. You can also access your plan

information from the convenience of your home computer by

visiting www.carefirst.com/myaccount.

Sincerely,

Rich Macha,

Senior Director,

Customer Service & Technical Support.

I thank the gentleman from Illinois. Your comments are right on.

Before we move on, I want to share with you, I heard from a gentleman today, a businessman in Greenville Alabama, and I am going to quote him: ``Economic conditions being what they are, we are in a situation where real estate values are declining, demand for our products is declining, and the value of the dollar on world markets is declining. All of these factor into the uncertainty of business today. In the long term, I can't see any expansion until regulations are eased and the health care bill is killed.''

Now, you want to talk about whether or not we have a jobs plan? This is their jobs plan. What this businessman in Greenville, Alabama, is facing is exactly what the other side of the aisle has proposed, and he can't create jobs.

We have time and time again shown leadership here in the House, in the majority, trying to repeal this job-killing legislation, and we run into roadblock after roadblock with the Senate majority and with the White House.

I would now like to yield time to the gentlelady from Washington.

I thank the gentlelady from Washington. Again, you make great points. And what we all know as we travel around our districts and we talk to business owners is that it's that very uncertainty associated with ObamaCare that is preventing these job creators to create jobs. They're sitting in their boardrooms, they're sitting around the table in the break room and they're saying, How do we plan for 2014 when we don't know how this is going to affect us? All of the regulations that have yet to be written. Yet, right before we have this hour to share together and to share with America, we see posters of a tombstone where we're out to kill Medicare. Yet ObamaCare alone cuts Medicare by $500 billion.

We have a plan. They don't have a plan. Their plan is the status quo and Medicare dies. That's their plan. Our plan sustains Medicare for this generation and future generations.

Thank you so much.

I now yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Thank you so much. I appreciate your comments.

As I did, you brought up Boiler MACT. I do want to point out that we have a colleague from Virginia, the gentleman from Virginia, Representative Morgan Griffith, who introduced legislation just yesterday--again showing leadership on this side of the aisle--about deregulating the EPA to issue achievable standards for industrial, commercial and institutional boilers, process heaters, incinerators, and for other purposes. For that, we are very grateful for his leadership.

I would now like to yield time to the gentleman from Colorado.

Thank you so much.

I would now like to yield to the gentleman from New York.

I thank the gentleman from New York.

Before I call on the gentleman from Arkansas, I just want to make a point to your story about a company here in the United States trying to achieve exactly what you're talking about. We know the private sector creates jobs. Our friends on the other side of the aisle, all they're doing is standing in the way. We continue to lead, to deregulate.

Recently, a startup company named Staxxon based in Ohio developed prototypes and patented an innovative new technology for shipping containers that could save U.S. manufacturers, retailers, and sea, rail, and truck carriers millions of dollars annually by reducing the cost of moving and storing shipping containers. Staxxon raised about $1 million, all private money, to hire 5 people, buy supplies, hire local welders, and build prototypes. The third party costs--attorneys, accountants, filing fees, printing, et cetera, of compliance with the relevant security regulations to raise $1 million in $30,000 units from private individuals was over $75,000, enough to hire a full-time welder.

He has expressed the need to make the regulatory barriers to raising private investor startup money for innovative entrepreneurial companies like Staxxon much lower while maintaining reasonable protections for private investors and large banking and investment companies.

It is easier for an individual to get a credit card with a $30,000 limit or a home equity loan for $30,000 than it is for the same person in this country, the United States of America, to decide to invest $30,000 in a United States startup company like Staxxon, which goes directly to the point that you're making.

Again, House Republicans continue to lead, but we don't see the same leadership on the other side of the aisle.

I would now like to yield time to the gentleman from Arkansas.

I thank the gentleman from Arkansas.

I would now like to yield to the gentleman from Indiana.

Thank you.

And as we move into a discussion now, with the little bit of time we have left, it's like owning a business that brings in $100,000 worth of profit, yet you owe the bank $400,000. That, again, goes to the example that you made about your household, our businesses. Everyone is tightening their belts in this country but for the Federal Government.

I would like to yield to the gentlelady from Washington.

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

And, again, at forums like this tonight, as I stated at the beginning, Americans deserve the truth, and the strongest truth comes directly from the mouths of Americans who are feeling the pain in their homes and in their businesses.

I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

And becoming less dependent on Middle Eastern oil is all about these very energy bills, that, again, we have shown consistent leadership on just in the 6 months that we've been in the majority.

I go to the gas pump. I pump gas in my car. I know how much it costs. I'm in the grocery store. I see the rising costs of food as it relates to these energy costs. And yet again today we see the President dip into our oil reserves, which should be for emergencies, yet we're using it for politics at a time when this country must become less dependent on Middle Eastern oil.

I yield to the gentleman from Colorado.

Very. Thank you so much.

I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Thank you.

I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas very quickly.

Again, thank you to all of the freshmen who are here tonight and the States you represent, the districts you represent. We all are here to work for America and American jobs. Thank you for your time, and I look forward to doing this again soon.

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

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 8 o'clock and 44 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned until tomorrow, Friday, June 24, 2011, at 9 a.m.

Thank you so much, and to the gentlelady from Washington, I appreciate so much the opportunity.

What an honor and a privilege to serve with each and every one of you and to be here on the floor tonight to just share with Americans about who we are and what we stand for and why we are here.

The question that I'm most often asked in the district and certainly here as well is: Why in the world would a 34-year-old woman with a 6- year-old and a 2-year-old run for Congress?

I will tell you that Margaret and George, my two children, are the very reasons that my husband, Riley, and I decided to enter into the race for Congress to represent Alabama's Second District: because we are committed to leaving this country, the best we can, in better shape for our children than it was for us. That's why we're here--and what a privilege to serve.

In college, I studied music and thought I was going to work in the music industry and went to law school to further those aspirations, where I met my husband, Riley, and we were married shortly after law school and we both went into private practice.

About 2 years practicing law, I was watching the news one night, and my predecessor on the city council said that she wasn't going to seek reelection, and I felt this lurch in my stomach. It was just really a gut check moment for us. I tapped Riley and I said, That's what I need to be doing. I want to serve my community.

Of course I had a wonderful example in both of my parents. My father is a public servant and my mother served in many capacities as a volunteer in our community all growing up, and I think that gave me that sense of urgency of wanting to be involved in my community. Riley and I didn't have children yet, but we knew we wanted to, and I thought, if we're going to live in this city and in this State and raise our children here, then we want to be a part of it.

I served 7 years on the Montgomery city council, and shortly after my son, George, was born--he was 8 weeks old--we started praying about this opportunity to run for Congress, to serve Alabama's Second District and our country. So little George was 8 weeks old, and I felt as a mom of these two small children and as a wife that I had something to bring to the table, that it was an opportunity to bring a perspective as the one that runs through the grocery store and goes to the gas pump as to how much Americans are hurting with the lack of jobs right now. Again, what a responsibility and a privilege. Riley and I wake up every single day and know that we have a real responsibility to serve the people that we represent.

I recently had the distinct privilege of going with you, my colleague from Washington, to Afghanistan for Mother's Day. I serve on the House Armed Services Committee. What an honor to spend that time with our men and women in uniform, but particularly the women that are serving overseas away from their children and particularly on that day. As a mom that's here in Congress, on a plane back and forth, doing my best to serve my constituents and my country, I realize, looking into their eyes, the tremendous sacrifice that they make, that what we do here doesn't even hold a candle to. It was truly an honor to get to spend that time in the war zone, to have a better understanding of what our men and women sacrifice for our liberty and freedom that we have right here.

I am committed to doing my part to help remove this cloud of uncertainty that is hanging over job creators in the United States of America. As I travel throughout my district--and all of you do--I hear story after story about what is the government going to do to us next. I was at a manufacturing company 2 weeks ago in the district where they put a $1 million addition to their 700,000 square foot manufacturing facility, remanufacturing, only to keep up with the regulations that are imposed on them by the Federal Government. This is where we are. How in the world can we expect the private sector to be creating jobs when the heavy hand of government is that strong?

So I am committed to that, and I am committed to real reforms that will allow for the private sector to do what they do best. That is what our country was founded on. I am proud to serve my State and my country as a Republican woman, but more importantly as a conservative committed to doing my part to get our country back on track, not for the next election but for the next generation.

Thank you.

I appreciate my colleague from Arkansas for giving us time tonight to talk about this most important issue, which is jobs.

It is the number one issue here, and what I see and we've all testified to tonight is that, as we travel throughout our districts, the number one thing that we hear from business owners all throughout the United States is the heavy hand of government has created so much uncertainty that the private sector, even those who have the ability to create jobs, are not doing so because they're fearful. They don't know what the Federal Government is going to do to them next, and this is so evident by the recent unemployment numbers that have come out.

Since the first day that this administration took office through the end of April of this year, the economy has lost 2.5 million jobs. That is an average of 3,044 jobs every single day. And unfortunately, and just to talk about the gentlelady from Washington's unemployment numbers, those numbers aren't even necessarily correct, because the rate is so much higher because so many job seekers are giving up and they are leaving the labor force.

I traveled, like you all did, throughout my district this week, and I found myself at Rand Manufacturing, and they manufacture water heaters. It's a household name. They have over 1,000 jobs in the city of Montgomery, and they brought me into a room that was used for research and development for their company, but it was an addition, a $1 million addition to their headquarters which is already over 700,000 square feet, but $1 million that they had to invest due to regulation alone. This is not a research and development facility to further their products. This is to keep up with the government regulations that they have to comply with.

How in the world can we expect the private sector to invest in job creation when every dime they have is going toward complying with government regulation? Companies in the United States of America are hitting the brakes on hiring and production. And to go back to the U.S. factory sector, the engine of our recovery, it had its biggest 1-month slowdown since 1984, and they showed private sector hiring dropped drastically.

You know, I'm a mom. I have two children, Margaret and George, who you hear me talk about often, and a lot of Members have their children up here this week with them. And as I look around the floor and I see these young people, I think: This is why we're here. And as was so eloquently said, it has to be about the future generation and not the next election. And when I look into my children's eyes, I am reminded about how important it is that we do all we can, which is what we are. We're leading. We're doing all we can to lift this heavy hand of government. And when I go to the grocery store and when I'm at the gas pump, we see it. We feel it. We know exactly what is going on.

In January of 2011, President Obama said entrepreneurs embody the promise of America, the idea that if you have a good idea and you are willing to work

hard and see it through, you can succeed in this country, and in pursuing this promise, entrepreneurs also play a critical role in expanding our economy and creating jobs. That was President Obama in January of 2011. The Obama administration has done nothing to encourage businesses to create jobs. They have been obstructionists, causing uncertainty, this growing uncertainty with this overreaching regulation. Economic growth has been stifled.

House Republicans have taken steps to reduce spending in a meaningful way by approving all the legislation that the gentleman from Arkansas talked about to decrease spending for the rest of the year, and we adopted a budget that will cut nearly $6 trillion over the course of the next 10 years.

Our friends on the other side of the aisle have done nothing to demonstrate their commitment to private job growth in this country. Increased spending, misguided attacks on the budget that we passed, raising the debt without deficit reduction, and burdensome regulations--this is the plan being offered by the other side of the aisle, and this is not what the American people sent us here to Washington to do for that future generation.

I ask the President and my Democrat colleagues to let us make sure that entrepreneurs continue to embody the promise of America. Enough is enough. More taxation, regulation, and litigation will not create more jobs in this country.

America is certainly at a crossroads. We have an opportunity here, and House Republicans are committed to taking every possible step to spur job creation and get our economy back on track so that Americans can do what they do best, that is, create and innovate and lead.

I again thank the gentleman from Arkansas.

To add to that, again, the district work weeks, this new schedule that we have, which affords all of us more time with our constituents, which is so important for transparency and accountability to the people who elected us to be here, who we are making decisions for on their behalf, representing their interests. I can't tell you how many times in these meetings--just what you are saying--in preparation for full implementation of this health care law, we are seeing businesses sit around conference tables, throwing their hands up, having to spend lots and lots of dollars that could go toward creation of jobs. But they're spending all this money just trying to figure out how this law is going to affect them and their bottom line. And it is a huge travesty. And I'm sure that each of you have had similar situations. But we know that there are free-market solutions to driving down the cost of health care in this country, and that law does nothing to do that, to increase competition and to drive down cost. But yet what we do see every time we sit down at the table with these business owners is, we see how the costs associated with implementing the law is killing them.

So I just wanted to add that to the table. And on behalf of the folks in Alabama that I'm so grateful to have the opportunity to be here to represent, I can't say it strong enough and loud enough about the plan that we have here in the majority of the House to do all that we can to untie the hands of our business owners so that we can get this country back on track.

Mr. Speaker, we face a budget crisis in this country.

America is broke. Without bold action, our budget situation will get worse--not better.

We also face a severe economic recession. The current national unemployment rate is 9.0 percent, and it has been as high as 10.1 percent back in April 2009.

With so many Americans out of work, the federal government should be doing everything in its power to encourage economic growth, not discourage it.

Cutting spending is critical to creating a pro-growth environment. Cutting spending is essential to sustained, free-market job creation.

House Republicans are the only group in Washington showing leadership on this issue.

We have voted repeatedly to cut spending in the short term. And we have passed a budget that would reduce spending by $6.2 trillion over ten years.

By contrast, it has been more than 750 days since Senate Democrats even passed a budget.

Recently, Sen. Reid said: ``There's no need to have a Democratic budget in my opinion. It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage.''

That is a breathtaking statement for two reasons.

First, the Senate is required by law under the Congressional Budget Act to pass a budget.

Second, working families across America live within their means everyday by following a family budget. It's simple: they don't spend what they don't have.

So I ask: Why shouldn't Democrats in the Senate live by the same rule?

Now the White House is asking us to raise the debt limit. Secretary Geithner wrote, ``Never in our history has Congress failed to increase the debt limit when necessary.''

The White House wants a clean increase in the debt limit. That means they want Congress to approve more debt without cutting back on any spending.

That is a failed policy. The vote we took tonight is a clear indicator that House Republicans reject that approach.

Our message is clear: We will not vote to raise the debt limit without significant reforms that change the culture of spending in Washington.

The American people already owe more than $14 trillion in debt. Much of it is owed to foreign nations, some of whom are hostile to American interests.

Allowing the government to take on more debt without cutting back on spending is simply irresponsible. Doing so would continue to erode America's financial strength and threaten the prosperity for future generations of Americans.

Raising the debt ceiling without spending cuts--akin to simply printing more money--would likely cause the value of the dollar to plunge and the cost of imports, especially gas and oil, to increase.

This would result in a significant increase to the cost of running a household or a business. The volatility and uncertainty would cause businesses to delay investing, growing, and creating new jobs.

The statutory debt limit was intended as a check on government spending. But what good is a debt limit that is always increased?

Instead of addressing the root cause of the growing debt, past Congresses have raised the limit ten times in the last ten years.

I, like many of my colleagues, were sent to Congress to put an end to that.

Our vote tonight is a tangible sign of the commitment we made to our constituents.

But the truth is that Democrats spent this money. They made this mess. They should help clean it up.

If the White House wants us to consider raising the debt limit, they should be at the table proposing significant reforms that yield trillions--not billions--in savings to the American people.

So far, that hasn't happened.

Tomorrow, the President has invited House Republicans to the White House to discuss the debt ceiling.

His request for a clean increase in the debt limit was rejected tonight. I hope that tomorrow President Obama will offer serious proposals to cure Washington's addiction to spending.

No lip service.

No gimmicks.

No smoke and mirrors.

The American people don't want more political posturing. They want transformational reform. They want commonsense leadership. They want discipline and fiscal responsibility.

I hope that is what the President proposes tomorrow. I look forward to evaluating his ideas.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the topic of my Special Order.

We face a budget crisis in this country. America is broke. Without bold action, our budget situation will get worse, not better. We also face a severe economic recession. The current national unemployment rate is 9.0 percent, and it has been as high as 10.1 percent back in April of 2009.

With so many Americans out of work, the Federal Government should be doing everything in its power to encourage economic growth--not discourage it.

Cutting spending is critical to creating a pro-growth environment. Cutting spending is essential to free market job creation. House Republicans are the only group in Washington showing leadership on this issue. We have voted repeatedly to cut spending in the short term, and we have passed a budget that would reduce spending by $6.2 trillion over 10 years.

By contrast, it has been more than 750 days since Senate Democrats have even passed a budget. Recently, Senator Reid said: ``There's no need to have a Democratic budget, in my opinion. It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage.''

That is a breathtaking statement for two important reasons: First, the Senate is required by law under the Congressional Budget Act to pass a budget. Second, working families all across America live within their means every single day by following a family budget. It's simple. They don't spend what they don't have. So I ask: Why shouldn't Democrats in the Senate live by the same rule?

Now the White House is asking us to raise the debt limit and Secretary Geithner wrote, ``Never in our history has Congress failed to increase the debt limit when necessary.'' The White House wants a clean increase in the debt limit. That means they want Congress to approve more debt without cutting back on any spending. That is a failed policy.

The vote we took tonight is a clear indicator that House Republicans reject that approach. Our message is clear. We will not vote to raise the debt limit without significant reforms to change the culture of spending in Washington. If the White House wants us to consider raising the debt limit, they should be at the table proposing significant reforms that yield trillions, not billions, in savings to the American people. So far, that has not happened.

Tomorrow, the President has invited House Republicans to the White House to discuss the debt ceiling. His request for a clean increase in the debt limit was rejected tonight. I hope that tomorrow the President will offer serious proposals to cure Washington's addiction to spending. No lip service. No gimmicks. No smoke and mirrors. The American people don't want more political posturing. Real spending cuts. A true commitment to that is what will spur job creation and get our economy back on track.

I now yield to the gentleman from Colorado for as much time as he may consume.

Thank you.

I yield to the gentleman from New York as much time as he would like to consume, but we do have to be done in about 10 minutes.

I thank the gentleman.

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois for such time as he may consume.

I thank the gentleman.

I now yield to the gentleman from Arkansas as much time as he may consume.

I thank the gentleman.

I yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Absolutely. You know, everywhere we go we hear about this job-killing legislation that is keeping small business owners, even those that have the ability to create jobs, fearful to do so because they don't know which regulation they are going to be hit from next, what legislation we are going to pass to find out what's in it is coming their way. So I hear it all the time. It is stifling to our economy.

We need to create, we need to make sure that we are creating an environment so that the private sector can create the jobs and not rely on the government.

I yield to the gentleman from Arkansas.

I will now yield to the gentleman from New York, and then we're going to wrap this up.

Thank you so much to all of my colleagues.

Mr. Speaker, I just want to say that allowing the Federal Government to take on more debt without cutting up our credit cards is irresponsible.

I am Margaret and George's mom, and I know you represent families here tonight. We all have a responsibility, to my children, to your children, to future generations of this country to leave this country better off than the way we found it. It all starts with cutting spending and getting our economy back on track.

With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

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

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 9 o'clock and 59 minutes p.m.), under its previous order, the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, June 1, 2011, at 10 a.m. for morning-hour debate.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I stand before you today to urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this amendment, very respectfully, from the gentleman from Ohio.

I would like to thank Chairman McKeon and his staff for agreeing to allow me and others the opportunity to debate this specific amendment.

The Air Force recently made a decision to combine two programs that fall under the Air Force Program Executive Office. EIS, currently located at Gunter Annex, Alabama, and ELS, located at Wright-Paterson Air Force Base, would be consolidated at Gunter.

Basically, the job of EIS is to design, acquire, install, and maintain operation support systems for the Air Force and the Department of Defense. And the job of the ELS is to empower the warfighter to leverage information as an effective weapon.

It makes good common sense for the management of these functions to be consolidated. Additionally, Air Force Materiel Command has approved this decision, and Congress should allow this decision to move forward.

My understanding is that no jobs from Wright-Paterson would be transferred, only the management of Air Force Logistics Systems would be removed from Wright-Paterson, where it has been for only 2 years.

This management role of acquiring and sustaining enterprise-wide logistics systems would return to Gunter, where it had been located for more than 20 years. However, the Turner amendment would require a cost- benefit analysis of the consolidation that would then need to be approved by the House Armed Services Committee, and this action would be costly and further bind the hands of our military commanders.

It is very important to note that the 2005 BRAC Commission Report showed that doing these operations at Gunter is more cost effective than at Wright-Paterson. Therefore, there is no need for another costly, drawn-out study.

It is important for us to allow our military commanders to make decisions that help the warfighter by increasing efficiencies when completing their mission. If we adopt this amendment, it will represent congressional interference in a decision that our commanders and the United States Air Force have already made.

I encourage my colleagues to vote ``no.''

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

Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Rogers).

Mr. Chairman, in closing, I would just like to say, again, that I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' The Air Force has made it clear that this is the consolidation that they want, that it is efficient for their operations at Gunter Annex.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

And I quote, ``Leadership means that the buck stops here. Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.'' Senator Barack Obama, March 16, 2006.

Mr. Speaker, cutting spending is critical to creating jobs. Without bold action, our budget situation will get worse, not better. House Republicans are the only group in Washington showing leadership on this issue. We have voted repeatedly to cut spending. And we have passed a budget that would reduce spending by $6.2 trillion over 10 years. By contrast, it's been more than 750 days since Senate Democrats passed a budget.

Last week, Senator Reid said, ``There's no need to have a Democratic budget in my opinion. It would be foolish for us to do a budget at this stage.'' By law, the Senate is required under the Congressional Budget Act to pass a budget.

Now the White House is asking us to raise the debt limit. Secretary Geithner wrote, ``Never in our history has Congress failed to raise the debt limit when necessary.'' But what good is a debt limit that is always increased? The truth is that Democrats spent this money. They made this mess. And now they should help us clean it up. If the White House wants us to consider raising the debt limit, they should be at the table proposing significant reforms that yield trillions, not billions, in savings to the American people. So far, that has not happened.

Mr. Speaker, last week my home State of Alabama faced the worst natural disaster in the history of the State. My immediate thoughts go out to the families impacted by the storm, as well as my thanks to the men and women on the ground assisting in recovery efforts. As of May 1, the Alabama Emergency Management Agency has confirmed 250 fatalities in Alabama from the April 27 storm.

Although the Second Congressional District dodged the full force of the storm, Elmore County sustained significant damage and, tragically, the loss of six lives. My thoughts and prayers go out to all of those who lost loved ones.

Since the storm, I have had the opportunity to tour the affected areas in my district and meet with the hardworking men and women working on recovery efforts.

Working quickly with Governor Bentley and the Alabama delegation, we requested shortly after the storm for the President to sign a major disaster declaration, which I am grateful that he immediately did.

Over the next coming months, I will continue to work with the Governor, the Alabama delegation, and the administration to ensure that critical resources and assistance is getting to those impacted by this horrific disaster.

Once again, the citizens of Alabama are in my thoughts and my prayers for them to get through such a difficult time.

Mr. Speaker, it is an honor today to stand on the House floor as one of the sponsors of House Concurrent Resolution 36.

Since coming to Congress, I have come to the floor several times to talk about my stance on abortion and the need to defund Planned Parenthood, and I am pleased to be a part of the lead on this important issue today.

Mr. Speaker, I am unapologetically pro-life and will continue to do what is necessary to protect the lives of the unborn. Every 2 minutes, a life is lost because of an abortion. That adds up to 3,300 lives a day or 1.2 million a year.

I believe I have an obligation to do everything I can to fight for the unborn and to prevent taxpayer money from funding abortions. Therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the piece of legislation in front of us today. It would prevent Federal funds in H.R. 1473 from going to Planned Parenthood, an organization that provides more abortions than any other organization in the United States.

About one of every four U.S. abortions is performed at a Planned Parenthood location or one of their affiliates. Data shows that since 1970, Planned Parenthood has performed at least 5.3 million abortions, and that includes over 332,000 abortions in 2009 alone. Planned Parenthood has made plain the centrality of abortion to its mission, mandating that every affiliate have at least one clinic performing abortions within the next 2 years.

My colleagues opposed to this piece of legislation will claim that the money that Planned Parenthood has been receiving is not used for abortion. I disagree. Money is fungible. By taking away Federal funds from Planned Parenthood, they will have to spend more of their private money on basic services and overhead costs rather than diverting those funds toward abortions.

From 2000 to 2009, Planned Parenthood saw an 80 percent increase in taxpayer funding that resulted in a 69 percent increase in the number of abortions and a 61 percent decrease in the number of adoption referrals.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on preventing Planned Parenthood access to Federal funds in fiscal year 2011.

Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 124, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``aye.''

(By unanimous consent, Mr. Hoyer was allowed to speak out of order.)

Legislative Program

Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

I rise in support of the amendment.

I oppose funding to Planned Parenthood. We should not be giving Federal funds to groups like Planned Parenthood that used the money for abortions. Planned Parenthood has recently made plain the centrality of abortion to its mission, mandating that every affiliate have at least one clinic performing abortions within the next 2 years.

Additionally, it is beyond shocking that Planned Parenthood employees were recently found on video aiding and abetting in the alleged sex trafficking of minors. This is not the first time that Planned Parenthood has shown such shocking behavior. It happened in my home State of Alabama back in 2009. A Planned Parenthood counselor was caught on hidden camera telling an alleged 14-year-old statutory rape victim that the clinic does sometimes bend the rules a bit rather than report sexual abuse to State authorities. Two years later, we are still seeing this outrageous behavior by Planned Parenthood employees.

It is time to stop funding such an organization with taxpayer dollars. Planned Parenthood ignores statutory rape law reporting, pushes abortion procedures, and opposes any effort to elevate the legal status of a fetus at any stage of development. It is not a proud day that citizens learned that these activities have been continually funded by the Federal Government. It is even a worse day when we are told that our government has funded Planned Parenthood with more than $363 million in government grants and contracts. The continual action by Planned Parenthood and its employees is demeaning for women and a black eye for our society.

Planned Parenthood in Kansas claims to be a trusted source of health care and education for thousands of women, men and children; yet it was charged with 107 criminal counts, including failure to report sexual abuse and falsifying documents in order to perform illegal late-term abortions. Planned Parenthood in California has privately admitted to overcharging the State and Federal Government by at least $180 million for birth control pills despite internal and external warnings that its billing practices were improper.

Planned Parenthood in Indiana has been accused of endangering the safety and well-being of minor girls by intentionally circumventing State parental involvement laws and breaking State laws by refusing to report statutory rape. Funding must be stopped. Planned Parenthood must not be granted any more taxpayer dollars to push their agenda to take away the rights of the unborn. I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on the Pence amendment and stop the funding of Planned Parenthood.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

I oppose increased funding for title X. We should not allocate Federal funds to groups like Planned Parenthood that use the money for abortion.

Planned Parenthood has recently made plain the centrality of abortion to its mission, mandating that every affiliate have at least one clinic performing abortions within the next 2 years. Additionally, it is beyond shocking that Planned Parenthood employees were recently found on video aiding and abetting in the alleged sex trafficking of minors.

This is not the first time that Planned Parenthood has shown such shocking behavior. It happened in my home State of Alabama back in 2009. A Planned Parenthood counselor was caught on hidden camera telling an alleged 14-year-old statutory rape victim that the clinic ``does sometime bend the rules a little bit'' rather than report sexual abuse to State authorities. Two years later, we are still seeing this outrageous behavior by Planned Parenthood employees. It is time to stop funding such an organization with taxpayer dollars.

Planned Parenthood ignores statutory rape law reporting, pushes abortion procedures, and opposes any effort to elevate the legal status of a fetus at any stage of development. It is not a proud day that citizens learn that these activities have been continually funded by the Federal Government. It is an even worse day when we are told that our government has funded Planned Parenthood with more than $363 million in government grants and contracts.

Since fiscal year 1998, title X has seen increased funding for 10 of the 12 years. From fiscal year 1998 to fiscal year 2010, title X funding has increased by over 56 percent. In appropriations for fiscal year 2010, title X saw a 3.3 percent increase in funding, which was a $10 million increase over 2009 funding. This is unacceptable spending at a time that we must cut Federal spending.

The continual action by Planned Parenthood and its employees is demeaning for women and a black eye on our society. Funding must be stopped. We should not spend any more taxpayer dollars to push Planned Parenthood's agenda to take away the rights of the unborn.

I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the amendment to add money to title X.

I yield back the balance of my time.