Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, the President's budget is a recipe for high inflation, higher interest rates and a permanent downsizing of the U.S. economy.

For the President to say that this budget has fiscal year discipline defies all common sense. The President says he will cut the deficit in half over the next 5 years. However, that is only after he hikes it to over $1 trillion in the first year. His promise of never having a balanced budget has even caused our largest public debt holder, the People's Republic of China, to take notice and express concern over the lack of fiscal responsibilities in this budget.

When the economy begins to recover, public borrowing under the President's budget will compete with the demand for private borrowing, leading to a dramatic rise in interest rates and inflation, weakening the value of the dollar and lessening the value of U.S. Treasury notes.

Mr. Speaker, this budget taxes too much, spends too much and borrows too much and must be defeated.

Madam Speaker, on rollcall No. 100 I was not recorded because I was absent so that I might testify at a public hearing before the Colorado Ethics Commission. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall No. 101 I was not recorded because I was absent so that I might testify at a public hearing before the Colorado Ethics Commission. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall no. 102 I was not recorded because I was absent so that I might testify at a public hearing before the Colorado Ethics Commission. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall no. 103 I was not recorded because I was absent so that I might testify at a public hearing before the Colorado Ethics Commission. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall no. 104 I was not recorded because I was absent so that I might testify at a public hearing before the Colorado Ethics Commission. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall no. 105 I was not recorded because I was absent so that I might testify at a public hearing before the Colorado Ethics Commission. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall no. 106 I was not recorded because I was absent so that I might testify at a public hearing before the Colorado Ethics Commission. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall no. 107 I was not recorded because I was absent so that I might testify at a public hearing before the Colorado Ethics Commission. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no.''

On rollcall no. 108 I was not recorded because I was absent so that I might testify at a public hearing before the Colorado Ethics Commission. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

On rollcall no. 109 I was not recorded because I was absent so that I might testify at a public hearing before the Colorado Ethics Commission. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Madam Speaker, last Friday, at Ft. Logan National Cemetery in Colorado, Captain Marvin Westberg was laid to his rest with full honors. He passed away February 18 at the age of 87.

Captain Westberg attended what is now the University of Northern Colorado, in Greeley. He then joined the United States Navy, spending 22 years on active duty. He served in both WWII and the Korea War. After retiring from the United States Navy in 1964, he started a second long career with United Airlines.

I have spoken to Marv on several occasions. Among the best stories he told was about one instance when he was training a young pilot to fly. Marv fired up his trademark pipe in the cockpit and gave the trainee a command, to which the trainee replied, ``Can't see sir, too much smoke, sir!'' Marv never forgot that the trainee was the elder George Bush. Marv also witnessed the surrender of Japan from his ship, anchored next to the USS Missouri in Tokyo harbor, on September 2, 1945.

Madam Speaker, our nation and our liberties are built from the service of men and women like Captain Marvin Westberg. He contributed his talents and abilities to our national defense, to our nation's economy, to our political system, and to the life of his friends and neighbors. I just wanted to take a small moment to recognize his service, and his career.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to H.R. 1106.

The poison pill in this legislation is the cramdown provision. And the cramdown provision will create uncertainty in our credit markets at the very time that we are trying to stabilize our financial system. It will significantly raise the cost of borrowing, not just for Americans who are trying to refinance their homes, but for all future American homeowners. It will significantly raise the cost of borrowing because it will create a risk premium that lenders will have to place on these loans, knowing full well that if the value of the property goes down, then they will take a loss. But the legislation also creates a fiction that if the value of the property rises, that the lenders will be able to recover some of those losses.

This cramdown provision is wrong for restoring our credit markets and it is wrong for the millions of future homeowners across this country who will be forced to pay more for those who will be able to use our court system to pay less.

I would encourage a ``no'' vote on this legislation.

Madam Speaker, buried in the stimulus bill that we will be voting on today is a provision that will gut the welfare reform measures that the Congress passed in 1996. The legislation will move us down a path that will take us away from welfare reform that required work, training, and education in exchange for benefits, back to the old system that says to single young women that, as long as you don't get married, don't get a job, and keep having children, that we will continue to subsidize you at taxpayers' expense.

The old system that this legislation moves us to kept generations of American families in poverty, and I urge a ``no'' vote on the stimulus bill.

Thank you, Congressman Akin. You're absolutely right. This legislation will hurt this country. It will hurt us in the short run. It will hurt us in the long run. Primarily because it does a couple of things. First of all what it doesn't do is provide the kind of stimulus that the advocates for this legislation are talking about. It is not front end, so it is not timely; it is not targeted in the sense that all of its elements are not stimulative in terms of being jobs-producing; and it is not temporary in that it creates a lot of recurring obligations. And so that as the economy is moving up out of a recession, what you then have is the government is still running deficits to pay for these programs and that that borrowing, competing with private sector borrowing, driving up interest rates, driving up inflation and hurting the long-term abilities of this economy to recover from that. So I think that it's absolutely the wrong course for this country. A lot of actions have already occurred. The Congress has already enacted $700 billion in the form of TARP to get the credit markets moving. Some of that well spent, some of that not.

Fortunately States such as Colorado have a balanced budget requirement so they're not allowed to run an ocean of red ink like the Federal Government, so there is certainly an advantage there in terms of fiscal responsibility and accountability that certainly doesn't exist with this legislation.

What you had to do as a small business owner is to restructure your business to make it more efficient. There's no effort whatsoever to restructure government to make it more efficient. And States are asking for their own bailout. It relieves them of that responsibility.

Congressman Akin, we are ignoring small business, which is the backbone of this economy, in this equation. And the central issue there is I think we've got to look at the grassroots of our financial system and we see there that credit markets aren't moving. And I think if we examine some of the regulatory framework around that as well as the TARP elements that are not working at that level, that's the central issue to get the economy moving, not pouring in billions and billions of dollars in wasteful spending.

Madam Speaker, the American people are hurting and our economy is in recession.

Congress is right to take action to stimulate the economy, but the American people know that we cannot borrow and spend our way back to prosperity. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 is a massive and wasteful government spending bill that will not stimulate our economy but will recklessly plunge our Nation deeper and deeper into debt.

The deficit for the next 2 years is already projected to be $2 trillion. If deficit spending were an effective economic stimulus, then the economy would be on the verge of a recovery. But it isn't.

Congress can accelerate the process of economic recovery by passing legislation that will improve the incentives that drive economic activity. Lowering tax rates will create the incentives for individuals and businesses to save, to work, to invest their money.

Madam Speaker, the American people are hurting and they deserve a better proposal than this.