Floor Statements

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I'd like to have the Record reflect very clearly that if Representative McCollum gets her way, she will kill building the bridge over the St. Croix River. As we all know, and as our office has been told, this is one of the longest, if not the longest, unfinished bridge projects in the history of the United States. That's why it's come to this point, Mr. Speaker, where we actually have to go to Congress to get permission from the Federal Government so that the State of Minnesota and the State of Wisconsin can build this commonsense bridge at their own expense, and that's the point that we're at.

Not only will Representative McCollum be acting against the wishes of 86 percent of the people that live and reside in the St. Croix River Valley, the responsibility for the increased costs of building this bridge rests squarely on the shoulders of Representative McCollum and on her compatriots who have fought for decades to kill the building of this bridge.

The cost? The bridge would have cost $80 million to complete back in 1992 if her compatriots wouldn't have tied this bridge project up for decades in the Federal courts in nuisance lawsuits. And why? Because they said there was pollution that was involved. And what was this pollution that they asserted? They said it would be visual pollution. Visual pollution? Because a Federal bureaucrat came out to this river and pointed to the river and said that they didn't think that a bridge would look good built on this river, and that's in spite of the fact that there's already a bridge that's here on this river. This is a wide part of the river. This is the river that is literally the birthplace of Minnesota. As long as people have been in the State of Minnesota, Stillwater is the birthplace.

I've been working on this issue as a young mother living in this community, as an activist citizen who saw what a commonsense project this is. Representative McCollum has talked about this being a mega- bridge. This is a four-lane bridge. And after all, why wouldn't you build a four-lane bridge when you have a four-lane highway on Minnesota connected to a four-lane highway in Wisconsin? Representative McCollum is suggesting that we should be building a two or a three-lane bridge. Why would you build a bridge that would be obsolete the day that it's opened? You would build a commonsense, four-lane bridge to connect two four-lane highways.

This is also a center for industry in this region. We have not only the prison, the State prison; we have also one of the largest window manufacturers in the world, we have the sewer treatment plant, the water treatment plant, and we have a marina. This is the place that has been the site that's been selected as the perfect place to build this bridge to connect these two communities.

As we've heard before, this is an area that has a bridge that currently has a safety rating that's far below the safety rating of the bridge that collapsed in Minneapolis in 2007. We have a historic opportunity, a once-in-a-lifetime magic moment when we have Governors that are Republican and Democrat, Senators that are Republican and Democrat, representatives that are Republican and Democrat, saying, for once let's come together and do what the people expect.

And why did we get to this point? Bureaucratic red tape. We are here in foursquare agreement with the administration, saying, let's get this done on behalf of the people of these two States. Let's do what should have been done decades ago, and let's build this commonsense bridge.

Stillwater, Minnesota is the site of Minnesota's birthplace. And now it's the site of what we are told is the longest-running, unfinished bridge project in the Nation. In the 1950s, discussions began for a replacement to the current, 1931 Lift Bridge, connecting Minnesota and Wisconsin, over the St. Croix River.

In 1992, we saw progress. That year, a coalition of residents, businesses, transportation officials and environmental experts, settled on a bridge design to replace the existing Lift Bridge. They proposed a four-lane bridge to connect four-lane highways in both states to be built south of Stillwater.

We are here today for Congressional approval for this project to proceed. Without

Congressional approval, the project will continue to face the government redtape and lawsuits that it's seen over the past 20 years.

The St. Croix River Crossing Project before us is a bipartisan project, with strong bipartisan support. All four Senators from our States, each State's governor and numerous colleagues of mine all publically proclaim their support for this commonsense project. It doesn't get more bipartisan than this.

A recent survey of residents in the region shows an overwhelming 86% of people support the project.

The bill before us doesn't appropriate a nickel. This is no earmark. Instead, it allows a commonsense, bipartisan project to proceed.

I urge my colleagues to support S. 1134 because this is the final hurdle and our magic moment. Together, we can build this.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the innovative efforts of the Woodbury Fire Department. Throughout America's history, firefighters have always been our hometown heroes, and I am happy to share with this body the unique efforts of the Woodbury Fire Department.

Woodbury firefighters keep track of their ability to respond to various scenarios in training or real emergencies on a scorecard. Since the department relies on a small number of full-time firefighters as well as crossed-trained police officers to meet their requests, these scorecards allow each individual to have an instant and uniform way of measuring the best practices for each situation. Most importantly, it minimizes the human risk in new and potentially dangerous conditions.

Innovation has always been a priority for firefighters. While prevention is the best way to improve a home's safety, Woodbury firefighters take fire control one step further using a method called Positive Pressure Attack. This method allows fans to generate pressure to remove heat, smoke and dangerous gases before firefighters enter a burning building. Not only is this beneficial for firefighters, it helps to keep hazardous elements away from anyone who may be trapped inside.

The Woodbury Fire Department has consistently won 100 percent approval from its citizens, and it is easy to see why. They are the model of professional development and technological innovation. Mister Speaker, I am proud to represent such a fine group of people in my district and I ask this body to join me in recognizing their achievements.

Mr. Speaker, this month, veteran business owners from across the nation are receiving special training through the National Center for the Veteran Institute for Procurement (VIP). Upon completion of this training, these veteran employers are equipped with the knowledge and skills to compete in the federal government contract process. Today it's my honor to recognize one of those veterans, President and CEO of JEMNI Inc., Mark Ellson, of Woodbury, Minnesota upon his graduation from VIP.

As a small-business owner, Mark brings more than 20 years of experience to providing services and products for his customers. Mark was a perfect candidate for the VIP certification because of his distinction as an Army combat and service disabled veteran and his dedication to hiring other disabled veterans. VIP invests in veteran- owned businesses because they know owners, like Mark, will strongly consider hiring and mentoring a veteran for future business growth. This VIP certification strengthens Mark's ability to secure federal government contracts that will grow his business, and in turn, increase job opportunities for veterans.

Mr. Speaker, Mark's dedication to veterans is admirable in every way and it is my sincere wish that the VIP certification will continue to create jobs for these heroes in Minnesota's Sixth Congressional District and beyond. Please join me in congratulating Mark Ellson of JEMNI, Inc. on his graduation from the National Center for the Veteran Institute for Procurement.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Cold Spring Fire Department on their 100th anniversary this year. It is my honor to join with the Cold Spring community in celebrating this milestone marking a century of service.

Since ancient Rome, communities have depended on fire departments to control and prevent fires to homes, businesses and public buildings. Today's community fire department continues the work of fire management and prevention, but has added the responsibility of first responders for medical and other rescue situations as well. When so much is depending on individuals to volunteer for this dangerous work, we owe them our deepest gratitude. As the city of Cold Spring gathers to show their thanks to the firefighters who have trained, worked and lived in their community, let me add my gratefulness for the support they have shown these everyday heroes this last century.

October is also National Fire Prevention Month, so I also thank the Cold Spring Fire Department for their efforts to educate and train the public in fire prevention at home and in the outdoors. Mister Speaker, please join with me in thanking all of America's firefighters for their prevention efforts and then in congratulating the Cold Spring Fire Department on their 100th Anniversary.

Mr. Speaker, in 1985, Army Ranger Light Kevin Stone's life changed when the Army vehicle he was in tumbled over a mountain edge and down 144 feet. Stone broke his neck and suffered severe brain trauma to the point of losing every memory prior to the six months before the accident.

A true miracle, Stone now lives an independent life thanks to his service dog, Mambo. But sadly, rules at some Vets Hospitals welcome seeing eye dogs while preventing service dogs like Mambo from coming in.

The working best friends of our wounded vets must be allowed with them at all times in order to do their jobs--including during VA visits. That's why I'm proud to cosponsor Judge Carter's effort, H.R. 1154, legislation which will close the working-dog loophole and welcome all dogs into VA care centers.

The VA considers service dogs like Mambo needed prostheses, like legs or arms. And Stone compares Mambo to a crucial tool--a wheelchair.

Current policy allows each VA center to set dog guidelines. That means, Stone is given care at some facilities if Mambo is with him.

We can fix this problem by passing the Veterans for Equal Treatment of Service Dogs Act, or the VETS Dogs Act.

This will ensure working service dogs can accompany their owner to every single VA facility, just like seeing eye dogs are allowed to do. This will be a permanent solution for our wounded veterans.

Kevin Stone credits his service dogs--Mambo, and Mambo's predecessor, Jonah--with allowing him to successfully represent his country around the world. He's no longer in camouflage, but another type of uniform: Kevin Stone used his service dog to compete on the U.S. Paralympic team. He won bronze in Athens and he's set American records in Beijing. With Mambo at his side, Stone continues to represent the U.S. Olympic Committee on the U.S. Paralympic Committee's Military Program as a coach and mentor.

Not all wounded vets compete with their service dogs, but they do everyday things like other Americans: when they get on the bus, get their groceries, get their mail and go to the doctor's office, their service dogs are there.

Colleagues, you may not know a veteran personally injured in Iraq or Afghanistan, but go to a VA in your district, and you'll meet hundreds of our nation's heroes who gave so much, but had so much taken away.

If service dogs allow our wounded vets to lead happy and independent lives, then we have a duty to ensure government regulations help, not hinder, the relationship between dog and owner.

Join us as we work to better the lives of our vets and as our veterans are empowered to overcome challenges. Because retired Army Ranger Light Fighter Kevin Stone isn't playing a game when he tells Mambo to ``fetch''.

Mr. Speaker, throughout this debate over guaranteeing insane, never before seen in the history of this country levels of spending, President Obama has coolly stood on the sidelines, his armed crossed, very simply castigating Republicans for not giving him a $2.4 trillion blank check. Meanwhile, the only plan that the President has put forward is his February budget, which in itself contained yet one more $1.5 trillion deficit.

The President has no plan. Only the Republicans have offered plans. Now is the time for the President to show leadership, and the only leadership that he is showing is one that's saying tsk, tsk, tsk, trying to bring us to the brink when in fact we're trying to be responsible and bring this to a successful conclusion.

We call on the President of the United States to finally engage in the process.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion before us. While I embrace the principles of cut, cap and balance, the motion does not go far enough in fundamentally restructuring the way Washington spends taxpayer dollars. The principles found in this bill are a step in the right direction toward the fundamental restructuring we need in the way Washington spends taxpayer dollars.

Along with cutting spending, putting in place enforceable spending caps that put us on a path to balance and passing a balanced budget amendment, we must also repeal and defund Obamacare.

We must remember that Obamacare is the largest spending and entitlement program in our nation's history. That means, at a time when we can least afford it, President Obama added to our spending problem by the trillions. Without its repeal, we cannot have real economic reform.

At a time of trillion-and-a-half-dollar deficits and 9.2 percent unemployment--it was jaw-dropping to hear the President say this past Friday that we need only ``modest adjustments'' to fix our economy, and to suggest that 80% of the American people want a balanced approach, meaning tax increases, to solve our debt problems.

President Obama also said ``we don't need a constitutional amendment to do our jobs.'' But we have the problems we do because Washington hasn't been doing its job. And a Balanced Budget Amendment would have kept President Obama from adding more than 4 trillion to our national debt.

The current negotiations over the debt ceiling illustrate exactly what is wrong with Washington.

We should not continue to spend and borrow trillions that we don't have just because that's always the way politicians have done things in the past. Those days are over.

The American people have had enough.

The President needs to stop scaring our military and stop threatening default. Last Wednesday, I co-authored a bill that would remove default as an option and guarantee that our military was paid first. We can meet our obligations, keep our bond rating and keep our promises, but we have to make the tough choices now to turn our economy around and put Americans back to work.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Majors Manuel and JoAnn Madrid of the St. Cloud Salvation Army on their retirement after 4 years of dedicated service in our community and 40 years of service with the Salvation Army.

Since their arrival in St. Cloud 4 years ago, the St. Cloud Salvation Army has grown from 28 to 64 beds for the homeless, opened a transitional apartment housing program and broken ground for a new chapel last May. In the last two years alone, 47,000 people have entered the St. Cloud Salvation Army's doors for a meal, but they were blessed with so much more. From simple prayers for provision to places to rest their head at night, the Madrids have guided countless numbers of people from despair to hope with inspirational sermons, warm meals, and open arms.

Mr. Speaker, I ask that this body join with me in recognizing 40 years of service from Majors Manuel and JoAnn Madrid. Manuel and Joann live every day reflecting the mission of the Salvation Army: ``motivated by the love of God . . . to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination''. We are grateful for their service and wish them many years of happiness in their retirement beginning this fall.

Mr. Speaker, when rollcall vote 480 was called, I registered my vote as ``aye'' and then proceeded to an Intelligence briefing. When I returned to the floor, it was my intention to vote ``no'' on the next amendment and I registered my vote as such. Unfortunately, due to a staffing error, it was still the same rollcall vote 480, and my ``aye'' was mistakenly changed to ``no.'' To be clear, I do support the rule providing for consideration of the FY2012 Department of Defense Appropriations Bill.

Stated against:

I thank the gentleman from Iowa for yielding.

This is a very important issue and a very important vote that we have just taken here in the House Chamber. It is dealing with the Patriot Act. We have had calls, we have had requests on our Facebook, Twitter, and in our emails urging a ``no'' vote tonight on the Patriot Act. I cast a ``yes'' vote on this act. The Patriot Act did pass. This is why. This is an authorization for the next several years in three areas. One is the lone wolf exception. We have a new war, a new enemy, new tactics. The lone wolf is one actor acting alone. And if we get a tip, it may be at the last minute, and we've got to go in for national security reasons and find that actor. That is an appropriate use of gaining this intelligence and information.

Number two, roving wiretaps. We have changed from the days of telephones being wired into the walls; now we use a cell phone. A lot of modern terrorists will buy a thousand ``go'' phones. They'll make one call, use a cell phone, throw it away like it's a disposable phone, pick up another cell phone, make another call. So we have to have the ability to be able to go to whichever phone a potential alleged terrorist may be using.

Now the third exception is the business records section; this is section 215. This is the section that most people have the greatest worries about. They worry about the infringement of Fourth Amendment rights. I worry about that too. I spent all week this week going to Members who I felt would oppose the Patriot Act. I went to people who are national voices who oppose the Patriot Act to find out what their concerns were, because I'm a lawyer. I genuinely am concerned about making sure that we never cross the line as a Federal Government.

Why? Because I think government is too big. I think we intervene too much in people's lives. I certainly don't want to give the government the unfettered right to go in and access my personal private records. This is what I know to be true about section 215 and why I could vote for it.

Number one, no right of gaining access to records can be given unless a Federal agent goes to a judge first. They have to go to the FISA court. Also, there has to be a connection to national security interests or to a foreign government. We've got that level of protection. When they go and make these requests, of which there have been 300-some requests, then they can go and they can gain access to a record.

Now, these are business records. These aren't records in my basement or your basement. These are records that a company has, like a phone company or a bank, but they're used in only the limited case where a judge first grants permission.

So what does that mean?

That means that it is constitutional in that the individual American's due process rights are observed because a Federal agent first has to go to a judge, a judge has to apply due process to that request, and then from there then access can be given to records, not in an individual's house but from a business. And then during the course of investigation--again, remembering, this is if there is a threat of a national security incident only.

Then during the course of an investigation, it's well understood if we're investigating a terrorist, if we get a lead that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed has a phone, we get his information, we are able to access records that are somehow connected to an alleged terrorist--or now an admitted terrorist, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed--we have to be able to have the means. Do we tip off someone like a Khalid Sheikh Mohammed that we're looking at his records? Of course not. That would be absurd.

So, it's a very different time and a very different war and we're observing Fourth Amendment rights. Now, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is not an American. He is not an American citizen. He is not an American. But for Americans, when we are seeking a request for a record of an American, the Federal agent first has to go and get this approved by a judge.

I urge people, Mr. Speaker, go to my Facebook site. We have all of the documents up to verify and show all of the reasoning behind the Patriot Act.

And again, this is a very important discussion this evening. I want to thank my colleague Steve King for bringing this to people's attention. It's a very important vote. I've spent all week trying to get the basis for whether the vote should be ``yes'' or the vote should be ``no,'' and I have confidence this evening that it was the right vote to cast a ``yes'' vote.

And again, I encourage anyone who is interested to go to my Facebook site and get all of this documentation. Read for yourselves. Make up your mind. But in my opinion, this passes constitutional muster. And I can assure every American I would not vote for this bill unless I thought it did pass constitutional muster.

I thank the gentleman from Texas, who's doing a wonderful job this morning managing this bill, Pete Sessions.

Mr. Speaker, all of our Nation's great liberties depend on our national security. I think that's something that we can all agree on. This is a bipartisan issue. We're a Nation at war, and we're pitted against terrorists who are bent on destroying our very way of life. As the treasure trove of evidence, which we were so grateful to receive from Osama bin Laden's compound, confirms to us, the enemy is always adapting, always evolving, always plotting further attacks. We have to be informed, and we have to be one step ahead of the enemy at least.

It's our intelligence community, Mr. Speaker, that gives us heroic service, day in and day out. This morning I had the privilege of being at our Nation's Central Intelligence Agency, and I want to commend them for the work that they do, the brilliant work that they did most recently to secure this number one target. Nearly all of it goes unrecognized, Mr. Speaker, until a moment like last Sunday evening, May 1, when a grateful Nation learned that the men and women of our intelligence services, working hand-in-hand with those in military uniform, had brought about the demise of the world's most prominent and notorious terrorist, Osama bin Laden. Years of relentless and diligent pursuit yielded an overwhelming success.

And that's why I'm so honored to be here on the floor today with my distinguished colleague from Texas (Mr. Sessions) to stand here on the House floor as a member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, calling on behalf of my colleagues, both Republican and Democrat, to pass the FY 2011 Intelligence authorization bill, because the American people have made it clear, Mr. Speaker.

They've made it clear to us not only once but over and over again. They want this Congress to exercise the utmost seriousness when dealing with our Nation's spending crisis, and so this bill is a step in that direction. It ensures that there is proper congressional financial oversight, and I would like to tip my hat now to the Democrat ranking member, Dutch Ruppersberger, who has done a magnificent job, together with our chairman, Mike Rogers, in making sure that we work together as one, seamlessly, in a bipartisan fashion. I have been just so delighted. I've never served on a committee where I've seen greater bipartisanship because we've put down our partisan swords when it comes to securing the safety and security of our Nation.

And this bill is a step in that direction, ensuring there's not only proper congressional financial oversight, something that was lacking unfortunately in the last 6 years, but we are dedicated to making sure that our responsible approach with intelligence does not sacrifice the security of our Nation, and this measure which funds our intelligence community will ensure that our intelligence community has the resources they so richly deserve.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge the St. Cloud Area Chamber of Commerce Small Business Person of the Year, the Mark of Excellence, and the Entrepreneurial Success Award recipients. These individuals have stood out to the Chamber as ``those who have the courage to aspire to a higher level'' as business owners and community members.

Bernard ``Brownie'' Williams opened up a chiropractic practice in Sartell, Minnesota in 1981. Like many business owners, Brownie ran a family business where he and his wife were the only employees. However, as the community grew and changed, the needs of his patients changed as well. Brownie currently runs a full health clinic meeting the whole- body needs of the St. Cloud area. From family care to specialty therapies, Brownie is an image of what passion and dedication can accomplish. I congratulate Brownie Williams as the 2011 St. Cloud Area Chamber of Commerce Small Business Person of the Year.

Miller Architects and Builders of St. Cloud is a fifth-generation business. Dan Miller, the current owner, was raised in the family business and today runs it as a one-stop shop for his customers. Overseeing everything from design and financing to construction management, Dan has a legacy that now serves the entire upper Midwest. I am proud to honor Dan Miller as the St. Cloud Area Chamber of Commerce Mark of Excellence Award winner.

Especially in a tough economy, entrepreneurs are the oil to America's job and economic engine. John Schlecht opened up Crafts Direct after spending most of his career with other craft companies and supply stores. After a successful opening in 1990 and consistent growth despite the ups and downs of the economy, John is perfectly suited to be a model to other entrepreneurs and I'm pleased to praise him as the 2011 St. Cloud Area Chamber of Commerce Entrepreneurial Success Award winner.

Mister Speaker, I ask that this body also congratulate and recognize these men and their businesses as examples of America's unwavering spirit of success. Brownie Miller, Dan Miller and John Schlecht are just three of the many businesses that are adapting and thriving in our Nation, and they all deserve our gratitude.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor and thank Sheriff Gary Miller of Annandale for more than 30 years of service in law enforcement to Wright County, Minnesota. From his beginnings as a part time deputy in 1975, to his ten years as Sheriff of one of the largest law enforcement agencies in Minnesota, Sheriff Miller was a dedicated public servant whose contributions to his department and to Wright County cannot be measured.

While Wright County was growing rapidly, the Sheriff's department grew along with it, and Gary spent time in nearly every role as he rose through the ranks. The deputies under his leadership respected both him and his servant attitude. Sheriff Miller made a point to be a positive presence for the citizens he served and he was a familiar face in every city of Wright County.

During his term as Sheriff, Gary addressed a devastating growth in methamphetamine use helping to bring the number of methamphetamine labs in the county down to a near zero. Sheriff Miller also was known for his good fiscal management of the department, especially in recent years when the economy required lean management. One step towards this involved combining efforts with two other counties to create a state- of-the-art forensics lab that allows for quick and efficient processing of forensic evidence. In 2009, Sheriff Miller opened up a new law enforcement center and jail, a process that started only a year before he was first elected to Sheriff. That sense of completion is what led him to think about retirement, and his time as the county's highest law officer came to an end on January 3rd, 2011.

Like many counties across our Nation, the Sheriff's office in Wright County stands for justice and peace and we are grateful for all that they do to protect our families and neighborhoods. I ask this body, along with the Speaker of the House, to join with me in thanking Sheriff Gary Miller for his dedication to the Sheriff's department and to Wright County, Minnesota.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Chief Executive Officer Chris Coborn and all the employees of Coborn's Incorporated upon being named the Independent Retailer of the Year by Grocery Headquarters magazine. Based in St. Cloud, Minnesota, Coborn's has become a fixture in communities across Minnesota and the upper Midwest.

A uniquely American story, Chris is a fourth generation Coborn in a business that always puts family first. The work ethic and drive that led Chester Coborn to open a one-man market in 1921 still influence the decisions that are made today, and innovation has made Coborn's a leader in store development, club opportunities and consumer marketing.

Though he runs a range of businesses from a grocery distribution center to the bakery for each store, Chris never sacrifices quality. His retail stores--Coborn's, Cash Wise, and Save-A-Lot--are known for their emphasis on service to the customers that are considered family. The contributions this company gives back to the communities in which they operate are marked by service and giving. In 2010, $2.3 million dollars was donated to the Boys and Girls Clubs, YMCA, Big Brothers Big Sisters, and Boy Scouts and Girls Scouts. Donations were also designated toward high school scholarships and higher learning at St. Cloud State University, St. Cloud Technical College, St. John's University, and the College of St. Benedict.

Additionally, matching employee contributions to the United Way and fundraising opportunities for local groups create a true sense of community among more than 6,000 employee/owners who also participate in an employee stock ownership program. These are just additional ways that Coborn's Inc. treats its employees like family.

Mr. Speaker, Coborn's Inc. is a business that emulates family principles, hard work and service at every level. I ask that this body join with me in recognizing the accomplishments and contributions of Coborn's Inc. as they are named the Independent Retailer of 2011 by Grocery Headquarters Magazine.

I thank Mr. King for yielding.

Make no mistake about it--the effort on the part of Steve King is to defund ObamaCare. This Chamber already passed a bill to repeal ObamaCare, which the American people have asked. This is now an effort to defund ObamaCare. Because as we have seen from the Congressional Research Service, the ingenious nature of the ObamaCare bill was to already put the funding in place so that if the majority lost the gavel, which they did, the new majority would be unable to defund this bill.

Speaker Pelosi said it well last year when she said we had to pass the bill to know what is in it. We only found out recently that literally tens of billions of dollars have already been appropriated to fund ObamaCare. It was put in ``mandatory spending,'' spending

where this Chamber would not have access to be able to defund the bill.

If we are unable to defund the bill now, make no mistake, Mr. Chair, this Chamber and the American people will do everything they can to make sure they put into place a new President, a new Senate, and a House that will have the requisite courage to finally defund the government takeover of health care.

Thank you to the gentleman from Iowa for offering this important amendment.

The liberal talking point in the debate thus far has gone something like this: We can't defund ObamaCare today because we have to focus on job creation.

Now, that is very interesting, coming from the liberals in this Chamber who spent literally trillions of dollars out of the public Treasury only to see 2 million jobs lost in the private sector because of their failed policies on job creation.

ObamaCare will likely create the largest government bureaucracy in the history of our country, filled with even more government jobs than any other agency. There is one thing that ObamaCare will likely do very, very well, and it's this: It will create the largest bureaucracy of government workers in the history of the Nation.

It isn't that we will necessarily get more doctors; it isn't that ObamaCare will necessarily give us more nurses or truly more health care.

What we will get from ObamaCare, according to the Congressional Budget Office, is increased costs in health care with a huge bureaucracy, all designed for the purpose likely of saying ``no'' to people when they need to have access to health care.

What a bargain, Mr. Chairman. Pay more, get less. That's the reason why I believe the Rasmussen poll came out last week and said that 58 percent of the American people are begging this Congress to repeal ObamaCare. Repeal we will, and defund we must.