Floor Statements

This is a difficult time in the life of our Nation. The American people are focused on jobs. But given the recent political rhetoric from the White House and what we just heard about letting tax cuts expire, one thing is clear: Democrats in Washington still don't get it. It's amazing.

In the midst of the worst economy in 25 years, Democrats are actually talking about embracing the largest tax increase in American history. You know, I don't know anybody back in Indiana who thinks they pay too little in taxes. The American people deserve to know that should Democrats get their way, every income tax bracket will increase on January 1, 2011. Every single one.

You know, you don't raise taxes on every American taxpayer during the worst recession in 25 years. Here's our commitment: As we did on their government takeover of health care, their national energy tax, and their failed stimulus policy, Republicans are going to stand in the gap against their job-killing agenda. We will protect taxpayers from the largest tax increase in American history with everything we've got. The American people know Washington doesn't tax too little; Washington spends too much. And Republicans are on the side of the American people.

Mr. Speaker, in the worst economy in a quarter of a century, American families are hurting. Businesses are struggling in the city and on the farm. And that's obvious to almost everyone in this country, except the Obama administration.

Remarkably, yesterday the White House issued a report saying that the stimulus bill passed a year and a half ago had ``saved or created 2.5 to 3.6 million jobs.''

As my three teenagers might say to me in like circumstances: Really, 2.5 to 3.6 million jobs? Unemployment was 7.5 percent when the stimulus was passed. It's 9.5 percent today.

It's important the American people know that the report issued by the administration yesterday isn't even based on actual numbers. It comes from what economists within the administration say is a highly inflated projection of how much economic growth is created for every government dollar that's spent.

The facts come from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. They speak for themselves. Since the stimulus was enacted, more than 3 million jobs have been lost in this country, a net job loss of 2.4 million jobs.

Enough with the talk. The stimulus bill has failed. It's time for new ideas, across-the-board tax relief, and fiscal discipline now.

Madam Speaker, nearly sixty years ago, Ensign Robert W. Langwell gave his life in service to our great Nation. Shortly after hostilities began in the Korean War, Ensign Langwell was lost at sea when his Navy minesweeper was sunk off the coast of South Korea. On behalf of a grateful Nation, I wish to thank members of the Korean government and U.S. military who were instrumental in recovering the body of Ensign Langwell. After decades of fruitless searching, he will finally receive the burial he deserves when he is laid to rest with full military honors in Arlington National Cemetery on July 12, 2010.

Ensign Langwell was a native of my hometown--Columbus, Indiana--who served in both World War II and the Korean War. He later moved to Indianapolis where he graduated from high school, and then served two years in the Navy during World War II, including time at Pearl Harbor. Upon his return, Ensign Langwell attended Indiana University where he graduated with a degree in marketing. He was later called to serve in the Korean War before passing away in October 1950 at the age of 26.

I offer my sincere condolences to David Parker, first cousin; Jerry Redford, Phyllis Johnson, and Brenda Showalter, all second cousins; Mary Parker, aunt; Jim Parker, first cousin; Nancy Cook, first cousin; John Parker, first cousin; and Karen Sprauer, second cousin. While Ensign Langwell's young life was tragically cut short, his valiant sacrifice is not forgotten.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and to the underlying bill, but it pains me to do so.

As the Record will reflect, I, and most of my colleagues in this body, have supported repeated extensions of unemployment benefits. And as I told my constituents yesterday, I was anxious to do so again.

American families are hurting. This economy is struggling in the aftermath of the worst recession in a quarter of a century. And as my colleague just suggested, this economy is also struggling in the midst of the failed economic policies of this administration and this Congress.

Millions of American families are struggling to make ends meet. Since the passage of the so-called stimulus bill, 2.6 million jobs have been lost, and unemployment hovers near 10 percent.

So I was anxious to be able to come to this floor before heading home for the Independence Day break, having supported an extension of unemployment benefits. But I rise in opposition because I think what the American people expect us to do is what they've been doing at kitchen tables and sitting around desks and small businesses and on family farms, and that is making the hard choices.

We can provide an extension of unemployment insurance benefits in this Congress, and we can make the decisions to pay for it. And I'm sure it is a mystery to millions of Americans that will be looking on as to why we didn't even try. This Democrat majority, after adopting so-called PAYGO rules, after hearing from so-called fiscal conservative Members of the Democrat majority early in this Congress about how we were going to pay for what we spent, has waived their own PAYGO rules to add $34 billion to the national debt. And I just have to think millions of Americans are asking why.

There are any number of actions that we could take, decisions we could make, reordering our priorities to provide for the families at the point of the need here.

The gentleman from Ohio just said that many of us in the minority were saying that we can't afford to extend unemployment benefits. We can afford it. But at my kitchen table when we say we can afford something, it means

we can afford to pay for it. Not just simply--when my wife comes to me and says, I want to make a major expenditure, I say can we afford it? That means can we pay for it. Here it just means getting out the credit card of our children and grandchildren and running up the national debt by $34 billion.

I also rise with a heavy heart in opposition to this bill because we are here extending unemployment benefits again because the economic policies of this administration and this Congress have failed. Would that the economic policies of the so-called stimulus had worked. The President said we needed to borrow about a trillion dollars from future generations of Americans a year-and-a-half ago or unemployment, he said, that was then 7.6 percent, would go over 8 percent. Now it's 10 percent on average around the country, and higher, as has been said, in many jurisdictions.

Remarkably, yesterday the President of the United States goes to Racine, Wisconsin, a place that has a 14 percent unemployment rate, and he made these comments. He said, Things just aren't as bad as they could have been. There could have been a catastrophe. And in that sense, the stimulus worked. The President of the United States yesterday in Racine, Wisconsin, said the stimulus worked. And then remarkably he went on to suggest that the Republican leader in Congress was out of touch.

It's mind-boggling that at a time when so many--I mean what would this administration and this majority say to a father who's been struggling to make ends meet, who has been borrowing money from family members to pay the mortgage because he can't find work? What would he say to the word of the President of the United States that ``the stimulus worked''? What would the single mother say who has been out of work persistently, who has applied for dozens and dozens of jobs, and has gone deeper and deeper in debt during these difficult times? What would she say to word that the stimulus worked?

The reality is that we have got to bring new ideas to bear on this economy. The American people know what's necessary to get this economy moving again. It's fiscal discipline in Washington, D.C., and it's fast-acting, across the board tax relief for working families, small businesses, and family farms.

What we hear from corporations across this country is that there is over $2 trillion in idled capital. We need to release the inherent power in this economy. We need to restore the confidence of capital markets in our commitment to fiscal discipline in Washington, D.C. And we can do all of that today and meet the needs of families struggling with unemployment.

By passing a fiscally responsible extension of unemployment insurance, we would send a message that we get it. We know people are hurting, we know the policies aren't working, but we want to practice fiscal responsibility. And for heaven's sakes, let's stop saying the stimulus worked. Let's try some new ideas. Let's come together across this aisle and do what's necessary to get America working again.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the amendment and also to the underlying bill.

I have great respect for the gentlelady who brings this amendment. She said earlier that there is, in her way of thinking, no military solution in Afghanistan. But let me say that surrender is a military tactic. I just oppose it.

This is a very serious time in the life of our country here at home; and it's easy, I suspect, for some Americans to forget that we're a Nation at war. But we are.

As I was reminded when I traveled to Afghanistan the day after Christmas this last year, at this very hour, we have men and women in uniform in harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq. And we owe them, in this moment, the resources they need to complete their mission, get the job done, and come home safe. We also owe them the respect of doing that without using our soldiers as a vehicle for other domestic spending priorities.

Military spending bills should be about military spending, and nothing else. And this legislation fails that test.

Before us today is a $75 billion spending bill, but less than half of this legislation will be used to support the Defense Department's war operations. Less than half. The military funding measure will spend almost $5 billion, supposedly, on a temporary bailout for a Federal Pell Grant program. This so-called military funding measure will spend $50 million on the Port of Guam, and $18 million for emergency reforestation, and $15 million for a highway safety study.

This military funding measure will also even spend, as we've heard in earlier debate, $10 billion on teacher jobs.

Now, I've been married, as of a month ago, for 25 years to a teacher. I support teachers. I believe education is a State and local function.

Anybody else remember that we just spent $53 billion in supposedly one-time spending for education in the President's failed stimulus bill? And now, on the backs of our soldiers, comes another $10 billion that has to be appropriated to save teachers jobs?

We can do better, men and women.

To top it all off, $63 billion of this bill isn't even paid for, just more deficits and more debt.

One of the ways the Democrats are saving a little bit of money here is by $3 billion in cuts to the Defense Department.

We can do better. Our soldiers deserve better. Let's reject this legislation. Let's do right by our soldiers.

Military spending bills should be about military spending, and nothing else.

Mr. Speaker, Federal spending is out of control, and the American people know it. $13 trillion national debt, a $1.4 trillion deficit this year, an 84 percent increase in nondefense discretionary spending since this administration took office. The Democrat majority's answer so far this year, no budget.

To answer this extraordinary fiscal crisis by refusing to lead is unacceptable. After a year of avoiding hard choices, now we hear the latest Democrat plan is actually to bring a budget resolution to the floor in some procedural motion known as ``deeming.''

Well, Mr. Speaker, you can't deem a budget that you never passed. The American people long for leadership in Washington, D.C., that's willing to sit down across party lines and face the fiscal and economic crisis of this country head on with hard choices. We can't get this economy moving again until we get Washington, D.C., under control.

I urge my colleagues, reject this phony baloney deeming of the budget. Let's sit down. Let's face our fiscal crisis head on. Give the American people the kind of leadership they want and deserve.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the conference report for H.R. 4173, the so-called ``Restoring American Financial Stability Act.'' We're used to creative titles around here, but I've got to tell you, during a time of extraordinary economic duress, millions of Americans unemployed, failed economic policies, it is darkly ironic that a bill that will do anything but restore financial stability is named for that purpose.

The truth of the matter is, when you look at this legislation, it's proof positive again that this majority just doesn't get it. The American people are not looking at Washington, D.C., and clamoring for more spending, more taxes, and more bailouts. They're looking at Washington, D.C., and saying, When are you going to focus on creating jobs? When are you going to set partisan differences aside, power grabs, and Big Government agendas aside to do something to put Americans back to work?

Under the guise of financial reform, Democrats today are pushing yet another bill that will kill jobs, raise taxes, and make bailouts permanent. Let me say that again. This legislation will kill jobs by restricting access to credit, it will kill jobs by raising taxes on those that would provide loans and opportunity to small business owners and family farmers, and it makes the bad ideas of the Wall Street bailout permanent.

Free market economics depends on the careful application of a set of ideals--traditional American ideals and principles. Chief among them is the notion that the freedom to succeed must include the freedom to fail. Personal responsibility is at the very center of the American experiment from an economic standpoint. It is that center from which we have become not only the freest, but the most prosperous Nation in the history of the world.

As my colleagues on the other side of the aisle know, I vigorously opposed the Wall Street bailout because I thought it departed from that fundamental principle of personal responsibility and limited government. And I rise today to vigorously oppose this legislation that takes the bad ideas of the Wall Street bailout and makes them permanent.

This legislation codifies the notion of too big to fail, a policy and an approach the American people have roundly rejected. It will give government bureaucrats more power to pick winners and losers. When a financial firm is failing, the Treasury Secretary and the FDIC will actually have the authority to take taxpayer dollars and decide which creditors to pay back and how and when they'll get paid.

The American people don't want Washington, D.C., in that business. They want a refereed private sector that says ``yes'' to traditional bankruptcy and ``no'' to bailouts, because we're here to protect taxpayers and not Wall Street. This bill fails in that regard. I urge it be rejected and let's start over with legislation that's built on American ideals.

Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule.

While other matters are being debated in the course of this, this rule also provides for consideration of a conference report on the Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act, and I rise in strong support of this legislation with a word of caution.

It was my great privilege to serve on the conference committee for this Iran sanctions bill that will be considered today. I believe this legislation represents measurable and meaningful progress in the United States' effort to economically and diplomatically isolate Iran in the midst of its headlong rush to obtain nuclear weapons, and I urge my colleagues to support it.

My word of caution is directed both to my colleagues in Congress, though, and to this administration. It is important not only that we adopt the Iran sanctions bill today, it is important that this administration implement this legislation.

We know the nature of the threat. Iran has made no secret of its intent to use nuclear weapons to threaten the United States or our allies, especially our most cherished ally, Israel. President Ahmadinejad said in 2005 in Iran that humankind ``shall soon experience a world without the United States and without Zionism.'' Led by this anti-American, anti-Israeli president, Iran has a long history of associating with terrorist organizations. If Iran obtains a nuclear bomb, it will only be a matter of time before terrorist organizations around the globe have access to this technology, and America and our allies--and our most cherished ally--will be threatened as a result.

It is also essential that we consider this legislation in the wake of the failed leadership at the United Nations. The adoption of so-called ``sanctions'' by the U.N. is nothing more than a hollow gesture which will do nothing except embolden Iran in its nuclear ambitions. We must lead by example.

I urge my colleagues to adopt this bill. I urge the President to sign this bill. But a word of caution: These sanctions include a number of waivers demanded by the Obama administration, but it is essential that President Obama carry out the clear congressional intent and cripple Iran's energy and financial sectors in implementing this legislation.

Iran could be merely months away from acquiring nuclear weapons; they continue to test vehicles that could deliver it. This is a time for decisive action by the American Congress and the American administration. Failure to act by this Congress or failure to implement these sanctions by this administration could lead to a second Holocaust. If we act and this administration implements these sanctions, we may yet see a future of security and peace in the Middle East, but if we fail to act, history will judge the Congress and this government in the harsh aftermath of a flash of light, a rush of wind, and a second historic tragedy.

Let us act. Let us adopt Iran sanctions. And Mr. President, do not waive these sanctions.

Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5175, the Democracy is Served by Casting Light on Spending in Elections-- DISCLOSE--Act.

However, I must say, rarely has a bill fallen so short of doing what its title says. In fact, this bill does the opposite of its name by limiting free speech in the political process.

The First Amendment says ``Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech.'' That right is cherished by all Americans and is to be protected by this Congress. Unfortunately, this bill is a naked attempt to cloud the free speech rights of millions of Americans; rights that were clearly affirmed in January by the Supreme Court.

It's for that reason that I am profoundly disappointed that the Democratic majority is trying to overturn the High Court's Citizens United decision. The justices were clear about the freedom of Americans to collectively participate in the political process through organizations. And the fact that the Court overturned a 20-year precedent speaks volumes about the importance of this issue.

But, instead of standing on the side of free speech and the American people, this bill will cloud the court's decision and cause uncertainty about federal election law. And that would happen during the months leading up to the November midterm elections.

Democrats suggest that the bill deals with corporations and unions even-handedly. That is false. In the interest of full disclosure, the American people should know that this legislation is sponsored by the two Democrats who are chiefly responsible for the election of Democrats to the House and Senate this fall.

Perhaps that explains why this bill's provisions include enormous exclusions for union expenditures but place extraordinary limits on corporations to hinder their ability to participate in the political process, despite the clear directive of the Citizens United case.

Corporations will have to make burdensome new identifying disclaimers.

Companies that are government contractors or that received TARP bailout money will be banned from political speech. And this bill will suppress speech by those who choose to speak out through associations, a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution.

This legislation is nothing more than an attempt to bring confusion to the political process and to discourage millions of Americans and thousands of organizations from becoming involved in the political debate.

Campaign finance is an issue that I've been committed to since I first came to Congress. I've worked with Republicans and Democrats alike in an effort to bring more freedom to everyone involved in the political process.

This bill sets back the freedoms affirmed just months ago by the Supreme Court.

Mr. Chair, I believe that instead of greater government control of political speech, more freedom is the answer. And while such liberty may be a bit more chaotic and inconvenient for some in the political class, as Thomas Jefferson said, ``I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.''

The answer to problems in politics in a free society is more freedom, not less.

I urge this body not to diminish the First Amendment for the sake of politics. Let's reject this bill and allow the American people to exercise their right of free speech and participate fully in the political process, as our Constitution intended.

Madam Speaker, I was absent from the House floor during rollcall votes 388 through 392. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes'' on rollcall Nos. 388, 390 and 392; I would have voted ``no'' on rollcall Nos. 389 and 391.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the distinguished gentlelady for yielding and for her leadership on this important legislation.

I also want to commend Chairman Berman, who worked in good faith on this legislation as well. It was an honor to serve on the conference committee, and I rise in support of the Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act.

I believe this legislation is urgent, and it represents measurable and meaningful progress in the United States effort to economically and diplomatically isolate Iran in the midst of its headlong rush to obtain a usable nuclear weapon. It is important not only that we adopt the Iran sanctions bill today; it is important that this administration forcefully implement this legislation. We know the nature of the threat. Iran has made no secret of its intent to use nuclear weapons to threaten the United States and our allies.

President Ahmadinejad said in 2005, humankind ``shall soon experience a world without the United States and without Zionism.'' Led by this anti-American, anti-Israel president, Iran has long associated with terrorist organizations, and this is the central point. Not only would this rogue regime come into possession of usable nuclear weapons should sanctions fail, but it would only be a matter of time before terrorist organizations around the world would have access to this technology. And that is unacceptable.

But as we adopt these important sanctions, a word of caution. As has been noted, these sanctions include a number of waivers demanded by the Obama administration. It is essential that the Obama administration carry out the clear congressional intent of passing crippling sanctions on the energy and financial sectors in Iran. As the joint explanatory statement provides, ``The effectiveness of this act will depend on its forceful implementation.''

Iran could be merely months away from acquiring nuclear weapons. They continue to test vehicles that could deliver it. Now is the moment for decisive action by the Congress and decisive implementation. If we act and this administration forcefully implements these sanctions, we may yet see a future of security and peace in the Middle East. But if we fail to act, or if these sanctions are not forcefully implemented, history may well judge this Congress and this government in the harsh aftermath of a flash of light, a rush of wind, and a second historic tragedy. Let that not be the case. Let us act in concert today. Let us adopt these Iran sanctions. And, Mr. President, do not waive these sanctions.

Well, it's becoming more obvious every day to the American people that this administration was slow to responded in the gulf, and the Democrats still don't have a plan. They don't have a clear plan to contain the sea of oil in the gulf and, remarkably, here on Capitol Hill, Democrats don't even have a plan to contain the sea of red ink in Washington, D.C.

Announcing this week, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer confirmed the Democrats' response to runaway Federal spending is to not do a budget. Failing to lead is not leadership. Not doing a budget is not an answer. The Democrats' refusal to write a budget is a shocking abdication of duty and a historic failure of leadership.

There has been a lot of talk these days about governing philosophies here on Capitol Hill, but their governing philosophy? Don't govern. This Congress owes the American people a budget, a list of priorities, and an outline of the hard choices that are necessary to put our fiscal house in order. No budget is no answer.

Madam Speaker, by direction of the House Republican Conference, I send to the desk a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration.

Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you all.

Those of you that don't watch C-SPAN incessantly may not know I serve as the House Republican Conference Chairman now, and I am just honored to be here with our former leader, a man deeply admired, and to see so many familiar faces back on the floor, back in the people's House. To Congressman Rhodes, it is wonderful to see you. Congratulations on a great tenure in leadership.

Thank you all for being here. We just adjourned the House Republican Conference, and I think you will see former colleagues and current Members coming over to say hello. We just appreciate your continued leadership. I appreciated what John Boehner said about your continued role in the leadership of this country. So many of you have gone on from Congress and played an even greater role in the life of this Nation in various industry and philanthropic ways, and I want to commend you for that.

But let me also say I want to commend Congressman Rhodes and our new president for the call for bipartisanship. In the 9 years that I have served on Capitol Hill, I remain convinced that we could learn an awful lot from those who have gone before on this floor in this current time. As we think about the extraordinary challenges facing this country at home and abroad, the hard choices that we are going to have to be making that can only be made if we act as Americans first and not on a partisan basis, please know that we're going to continue to turn to the men and women who have served in this place before.

We will have a competitive election, I expect, this fall. The American people will decide what the composition of this place looks like. I want to tell you as I came onto the floor and I saw a lot more people on this side than on that side, it's kind of how it feels for us Republicans right now, but whatever the American people decide. I want to thank you for being here today. Thank you for your involvement in the former Members group; some men and women that I have had the privilege of serving with are here.

But I also want to challenge you, the extraordinary and intractable problems--rising deficits and debts, a difficult economy--we need to turn to the wisdom of the men and women who have been here before. We need to turn to you to facilitate an environment of good will where we can solve these problems for this and future generations of Americans, and I know that we will. When I see where we have come from, the part of this national life that you've been a part of, I know that we will meet these challenges and make this the next great American century.

Thank you all for your involvement. God bless you all. It's an honor to speak to you this morning.

The oil spill in the gulf is a widening tragedy of epic proportions. BP must be held accountable for every dime of cost that will affect the families and the environment and the communities of our gulf region. And this administration must be held responsible, responsible for failing to provide the kind of energetic leadership that the American people expect and the law demands.

What's obvious to Americans across the political spectrum is this administration has been a day late since day one. Unable to make this crisis a national priority, we now hear that the President is poised tonight to go to the Oval Office in the midst of explaining the Federal response to this crisis and use it as an opportunity to press for a climate change bill.

The American people don't want this administration to exploit the disaster in the gulf to advance their disastrous energy policies. America needs a new energy policy. But cap-and-trade won't cap that well. This administration should work the problem in the gulf instead of working their liberal environmental agenda.