Floor Statements

Madam President, last week, as gas prices continued to climb, squeezing family budgets and putting more pressure on already struggling businesses, Democrats here in Congress sprang into action. Instead of actually doing something about high gas prices, our Democratic friends staged what one of my Republican colleagues accurately described as a dog and pony show. They rounded up what they believed were a few unsympathetic villains whom they could blame for high gas prices, hoping nobody would notice they do not have a plan of their own to deal with those high gas prices.

That has been the Democratic strategy from the beginning: Blame this crisis on somebody else, and see if they can't raise taxes while they are at it. They have been so shameless about it, in fact, that they have not even pretended they are doing anything to lower gas prices, readily admitting the bill we will vote on today will not lower gas prices by a penny. As the Democratic chairman of the Finance Committee put it last week: ``That's not the issue.''

Well, I would submit that for most Americans, high gas prices are in fact, the issue. This week, Democrats will show once again how little they care about it when we take up an energy plan that several more of them have admitted will do absolutely nothing to lower the price of gas at the pump. One Democratic Senator, a member of their own leadership team, called the bill a ``gimmick.'' Another Democratic Senator called it ``laughable.''

I would also argue that with Americans looking for real relief, symbolic votes such as this that aim to do nothing but pit people against each other will only frustrate the public even more. Americans are not interested in scapegoats. They just want to pay less to fill up their cars.

That is why this Democratic bill to tax American energy is an affront to the American people, and so is the President's announcement over the weekend that he now plans to let these same energy producers lease lands throughout the United States that his administration had previously blocked off.

The administration knows perfectly well that leasing--the act of leasing--is just the start of the development process, which is why its only hope is that the American people do not pay close attention to the details of the plan.

Permits, Madam President--permits--are what matter, and by refusing to issue permits in any meaningful way, the administration is showing its true colors in this debate. If the administration were serious about increasing domestic energy production, it would increase leases and, most importantly, it would increase permits.

In the end, the only thing Democrats will actually achieve this week is to make Republican arguments for comprehensive energy legislation seem even stronger than they already are. By pretending to want an increase in domestic energy production, the President is not only acknowledging that the United States has vast energy resources of its own waiting to be tapped, he is also acknowledging that tapping these resources would at some point help drive down the price of gas at the pump.

That is what Republicans have been saying all along. Now the President is acknowledging that: Supply matters. And American supply matters even more.

So the only thing that seems to be standing between Republicans and Democrats at this point is the Democrats do not seem to have the political will to follow through on their conclusions. And in this, today's Democrats are no different from their predecessors. Literally for decades, Democrats from Jimmy Carter to President Obama have sought to deflect attention from their own complicity in our Nation's overdependence on foreign oil. Every time gas prices go up, they pay lip service to the need for domestic exploration while quietly supporting efforts to suppress it.

But President Obama's energy policy puts the current administration in a whole new category. Over the past 2 years, the President has mounted nothing short of a war on American energy, canceling dozens of leases, imposing a moratorium off the gulf coast, arbitrarily extending public comment periods, and increasing permit fees. On the crucial issue of permits, the administration has held them up in Alaska, the Rocky Mountain West, and particularly offshore. Every one of those decisions has had a major impact on future production--and on future jobs, since every permit the administration denies is another job creation opportunity denied.

So the truth of the matter is, the Obama administration has done just about everything it can to keep our domestic energy sector down and to stifle the jobs that come along with it.

Until now, the President has stuck to attacking Republicans for being stuck in the present without preparing for the future. But this has always been a disingenuous argument. It ignores history, since we have repeatedly supported alternative fuels and renewable energy, as well as comprehensive energy legislation that commits us to the development of cleaner technologies. It ignores science, since even if a million electric vehicles are sold here by 2015, they would still only account for less than one-half of 1 percent of the entire U.S. vehicle fleet. However much we desire it, the transition from oil will take decades, and serious energy policy must account for that.

With this latest gambit, the President may have acknowledged the wisdom of our approach. But his plan to allow a few lease sales without corresponding permits falls short. Energy producers might end up with a lot of expensive land, but the rest of us would have nothing to show for it. A better

approach to this crisis is the Republican alternative that we will get a vote on tomorrow.

Our bill would return American offshore production to where it was before this administration locked it up, require Federal bureaucrats to process permits--to make a decision one way or the other: process the permit, make a decision one way or the other--rather than sitting on the permits. And it would improve offshore safety. Our plan not only acknowledges the importance of increasing domestic production, it does something about it, while ensuring environmental safety.

If President Obama and his party are serious about lowering gas prices, making us less dependent on foreign oil, and creating the thousands of jobs that American exploration is proven to produce, they would embrace our plan and stop pretending to care about a crisis they have done so much to create and, their latest public relations efforts notwithstanding, continue to ignore.

Madam President, this week we commemorate National Police Week 2011, and honor the service and sacrifice of the many men and women in Federal, State, and local law enforcement across America.

Washington welcomes thousands of police officers who come to celebrate National Police Week. They will honor their fallen fellow officers and rededicate themselves to their mission of serving and protecting their neighbors and their communities.

Among the visitors are hundreds of officers from my home State of Kentucky. I wish to personally welcome them to the Nation's Capital and express my gratitude to them for bravely laying their lives on the line to protect towns small and large all across the Commonwealth.

Approximately 900,000 peace officers are serving today across our country. Every year, between 140 and 160 of them are tragically killed in the line of duty, and 2011 is already proving to be a difficult year as 69 law enforcement officers nationwide have been lost in the line of duty so far, compared with 59 at this point a year ago. To recognize those peace officers who have lost their lives in the line of duty, and their loved ones, I was pleased to cosponsor a resolution designating May 14, 2011, as National Police Survivors Day. This resolution, which passed the Senate unanimously, calls on the Nation to honor the families of fallen law enforcement officers and to pay respect to the courageous men and women who have made the ultimate sacrifice while serving to keep our communities safe.

In my State, in the town of Richmond, the Kentucky Law Enforcement Memorial Monument stands as a permanent reminder of the high cost of protecting the peace. At a solemn ceremony last week, 24 names were added to its rolls, bringing the total to 485.

I know my colleagues will join me in saying the Senate has the deepest admiration and respect for police officers in every community across America. We recognize theirs is both an honorable job and a dangerous one. They bravely risk their lives for ours. America appreciates everything they do, and America is grateful to them and to their families.

I have here a list of 24 names that were added to the Kentucky Law Enforcement Memorial Monument this year. I ask unanimous consent that the names of those heroes be printed in the Record.

Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. President, anyone who cares about the future of our country should pay attention to the debate we are having right now in Washington. The outcome of this debate will determine whether America goes the way of debt-ridden countries in Europe where unemployment is permanently high and expectations are permanently low or whether we will claim our role as a place where people are rewarded for hard work and for taking risks.

This debate is important for other reasons too. Last month, one of the major ratings agencies gave the United States a negative outlook. It said that because of our debt, we stand a one-in-three chance of being downgraded. The consequences of that would be truly devastating, and so would the impact on our ability to govern. If we allow it to happen, we will be admitting that America cannot solve its problems. I won't accept that.

The fact that we have a crisis is not in doubt. Right now, America is taking in about $2.2 trillion each year in tax revenues, and each year we are spending about $2.2 trillion on mandatory spending programs and net interest on our debt.

What that means is that all of the other spending--every single discretionary dollar we spend right now on

roads, schools, defense, food safety, environmental protection--all of it, every single penny is borrowed money. We do not have a dime to spend above and beyond the dimes we have to spend by law. If that is not a fiscal crisis, I do not know what is.

The Democrats' solution to this crisis is simple: raise the debt limit--raise the debt limit--so we can maintain the status quo. In fact, the chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers said in a speech yesterday that it would be ``quite insane'' to do anything about the deficit while increasing the debt ceiling. That from the chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers yesterday.

The problem with that is it is not a solution. It is the avoidance of a solution, and that is not what the American people want. The American people spoke loudly and clearly in November. They want to see changes around here. Washington is mortgaging their future and their children's future by spending too much. They did not speak out last November because they expected Republicans to come here and raise taxes. They sent Republicans here to get our fiscal house in order, and that is what we intend to do.

Americans are still outraged that Washington did not do something to prevent the last financial crisis--a crisis most people did not see coming. Failing to prevent one that every one of us knows is coming is, of course, totally inexcusable.

So my message has been clear: Failing to do something about the debt would be far worse in the long run than failing to raise the debt limit, and that is why I am repeating my plea to the Democrats this morning: The time to avert this crisis is right now. The window is closing. We cannot raise the debt ceiling, as the President has requested, without major spending cuts now.

Some have suggested we use triggers. Well, the triggers have already been pulled. What good is a fire alarm that goes off after the building burns down? Agreeing to a trigger is to deny this crisis. We need to face this problem now--not tomorrow, not after the President leaves office, not after the markets collapse, not after hell breaks loose, not after we lose another 3 million jobs and the housing market collapses again--now, right now. Anything less would be a dereliction of duty and a signal to the world that America does not have the will to fix its problems. Republicans refuse to accept that.

That has been my message all along. That is a message we will be taking down to the White House later this morning.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Madam President, yesterday Democrats unveiled yet another attempt to slow American energy production, this time through a tax hike on American energy. They acknowledge, however, that this will not lower the price of gas, and they are right.

The Congressional Research Service tells us that raising taxes on American energy will do two things: It will increase the price of gas, and it will increase our dependence on foreign competitors. By taxing American energy production, they are also outsourcing American jobs. So let me get this straight: higher gas prices, fewer American jobs, and more dependence on foreign competitors at the expense of American energy? That is their plan? No thank you.

Madam President, I was happy to see the No. 2 Democrat in the House yesterday take a stand against the President's proposed Executive order, a proposal disguised as increased ``transparency,'' which would allow the administration to review a company's political donations before deciding whether to award a Federal contract. That is right; the administration would be able to review a company's political donations before deciding whether to give them a Federal contract.

Here is how he put it: This is the No. 2 Democrat in the House:

[The] White House plan to require federal contractors to

disclose political contributions could politicize the bidding

process and undermine its integrity.

Similar efforts have already been rejected by the Supreme Court, the Federal Election Commission, and the Congress during the last session of the Congress. Now there is bipartisan opposition to the administration's Executive order.

The White House is spinning this as ``reform,'' claiming the American people deserve to know how taxpayer money is being used by contractors. However, the proposed Executive order would exclude Democratic allies, including Federal employee labor unions, environmental groups, and, of course, Planned Parenthood.

As I have said, no White House--no White House--should be able to review a contractor's political party affiliation before deciding if they are worthy--worthy--of a government contract. No one should have to worry about whether their political support will determine their ability to get or to keep a Federal contract or to keep a job.

The issuing of contracts by the Federal Government should be based on the contractor's merits, bids, and capabilities. Under no condition--no condition--should political contributions play a role in that decision. However, the White House draft Executive order makes it crystal clear that if a contractor wants to do business with the government--if they want to do business with the government--they cannot contribute to the Republicans.

As Senator Collins recently pointed out, this Executive order would basically repeal the Hatch Act and inject politics back into the procurement process. This is simply unacceptable.

Democracy is compromised when individuals and small businesses fear reprisal or expect favor from the Federal Government as a result of their political associations. So the recent press reports about this unprecedented Executive order raise troubling concerns about an effort to silence or intimidate political adversaries' speech through the government contracting system.

The White House still has an opportunity to not go forward with this order, and you can rest assured we will be watching very closely because the proposed effort would represent an outrageous--a truly outrageous--and antidemocratic abuse of executive branch authority.

It is my sincere hope that the recent reports of the draft Executive order were simply the work of a partisan within the administration and not the position taken by the President himself. He should state his position.

Mr. President, we are waiting for your response.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

Madam President, later today the President is expected to speak in El Paso about our Nation's immigration policy. Getting immigration policy right is one of the more difficult challenges we face as a nation, and Republicans are committed to meeting it. As with most serious challenges, however, the only way we will make progress is by working on a solution that is acceptable to both parties. For Republicans, that means the President will have to present a plan that takes amnesty off the table and focuses instead on making a real commitment to border and internal security. If the President does these two things, he will find strong bipartisan support. If he doesn't, he won't.

Another difficult challenge we are solving only by working together is bringing down the Nation's debt. To that end, Members of both parties met with the Vice President last week at Blair House. The participants had what all sides agreed was a productive meeting, and they will meet again this afternoon. Unfortunately, there still seems to be a serious disconnect between the two parties on this issue. There are still those on the other side who think we can put off difficult decisions until after the next Presidential election or even beyond. Republicans strongly disagree. In our view, doing nothing about the debt would be far more dangerous in the long run than failing to raise the debt ceiling. I have said this before, and Speaker Boehner reiterated the point yesterday in New York. The warning bells are simply too loud to ignore this crisis any longer, and the debt limit debate presents us with a prime opportunity for meaningful, positive action.

If the last financial crisis taught us anything, it is that we can't afford to play with fire when it comes to economic forces this great. We need to get serious now before the crisis we know

is coming. That means entitlement reform needs to be on the table. This is a serious crisis. We must do something serious. Entitlement reform needs to be a part of it. That is the only way we will send a message to the world that we are actually willing to make the tough decisions needed to get our fiscal house in order. That is the only way the markets, the American people, and the rest of the world--especially those who hold so much of our debt--will believe we are on the right track.

As we prepare for a second round of talks, I would renew the call to get serious about this looming crisis and do something serious. I renew my pledge this morning to do what it takes to make sure we avert it without raising taxes or building in automatic tax increases in the future which would only destroy jobs. We can avert this crisis without doing harm to the economy or slowing down any economic recovery. That means no tax hikes now, and it means not rewarding the failure of a future Congress with automatic access to more taxpayer dollars. Above all, it means serious reforms. We need to summon the courage to make some tough decisions right now.

Madam President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, I rise today to pay tribute to a Kentuckian who for much of his life was

content to remain an unsung hero. But let there be no doubt now that Mr. Vernard Hughes Webb, who passed away last year, leaves behind a legacy of great accomplishment and service to his Nation. You see, for many years, Mr. Webb was a pioneer in secret reconnaissance and satellite technology that was crucial to America's efforts in the Cold War. He was one of the developers on the top secret CORONA project, a spy satellite effort, and was awarded a medal of achievement for his life's work by the Vice President of the United States.

Mr. Webb was born and raised in Letcher County, KY, and became the first in his family to go to college, graduating from Berea College in 1940. The day after the Pearl Harbor attack, he joined the Army Air Corps. Becoming a bombardier on a B-17, he flew 30 combat missions over Europe during World War II.

Later in the war, Mr. Webb developed the crucial idea that would change the course of not only his career, but perhaps his country as well. Assigned to a combat mapping squadron that was tasked with taking reconnaissance pictures over the Philippines, he came up with an idea to greatly increase the accuracy and efficiency of the cameras.

Mr. Webb ran his idea past his Air Force superiors, and in their infinite wisdom, they said no. So Mr. Webb did it anyway. He spent his own money to create a new camera. And when Vernard's superiors finally realized the worth of his invention, they asked him to implement it across the Air Force.

Vernard Webb eventually rose to the rank of major and became one of this country's leading developers of cameras and aircraft for surveillance purposes. He and his colleagues were in a race with the Soviets. By the 1950s, Vernard realized that his technology could be used not just in airplanes, but in satellites.

In 1958, Mr. Webb was assigned to the CORONA project, America's first efforts to develop a spy satellite. In 1960 the project accomplished its first success, gaining valuable intelligence on the Soviet Union and China. But for all those years Mr. Webb could only tell his friends and even his wife that he was an unimportant bureaucrat or engineer.

In 1995 the CIA declassified many documents pertaining to the CORONA project, and only then were Mr. Webb's accomplishments made clear. Around that same time, Vice President Al Gore declared that ``the CORONA project represents a crucial development in aiding the national security efforts of the United States.''

Vernard Webb passed away last Veterans Day. I extend my greatest condolences to his wife Katie Louis Webb, their children and grandchildren, other members of the Webb family and friends for their loss.

It is only fitting that after a lifetime of service to his country, most of it under a cloak of secrecy that preventing him from receiving the gratitude that he so richly deserved, that Mr. Vernard Webb will be interred at Arlington National Cemetery later this month with full military honors.

And I know my colleagues will join me in extending to the Webb family this Senate's thanks and appreciation for Vernard Webb's sacrifice and service.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that an article illustrating Mr. Webb's heroic life and career be printed in today's Record.

Mr. President, it is with sadness that I rise today to note the passing of one of southeastern Kentucky's most notable citizens, Mr. Harry Morgan Hoe. Mr. Hoe was a decorated World War II veteran who fought in the Battle of the Bulge under the command of GEN George Patton. He recalled once what General Patton said to his men then:

``Half of you guys are not going home, you know that, don't you? You're over here to take that hill, and if you don't take it, I want to see the truckload of dog tags that show me that you proved yourself.''

Well, Harry Hoe did return home, after fighting in five major European campaigns, and he certainly did prove himself. He received the Silver Star for gallantry in action, the Bronze Star, the Oak Leaf Cluster for heroic action and the French Liberation Appreciation Medal.

But Mr. Hoe's heroic service in World War II is just the beginning of his incredible life story. He would go on to meet the love of his life, his wife Mary, in college and return to his hometown of Middlesboro to work in the family foundry business. He would be elected to the State legislature, invest countless hours in volunteer work and community service, and become a role model for me and many others for his leadership, his humility and his dedication to the people of the Bluegrass State.

With his wife Mary, who passed away some time ago, Harry had three children and several grandchildren. I wish to offer my greatest condolences to the Hoe family and all of Harry's many friends who are mourning his loss.

Mr. President, a wonderful article that appeared today in the Middlesboro Daily News tells the story of Mr. Harry Hoe's life and career. It is a fitting tribute to a fine man and I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, first, we just swore in our new colleague, Dean Heller. The majority leader is giving a reception for him this afternoon. We hope many Members will take the opportunity to go by and welcome him to the Senate.

Mr. President, I am going to devote my leader time this afternoon to an issue which may not be on the Democrats' legislative agenda this week but which is certainly on the minds of most Americans every day. I am referring, of course, to the high cost of gasoline. All across the country, people are suffering from the runup in gas prices we have seen over the past few months. It is squeezing family budgets, tightening margins at already struggling small businesses, and it poses a mortal threat to any economic rebound.

This is a critical issue. Americans are looking for answers. Yet all they are getting from the President and the Democratic leaders in Congress are gimmicks and deflection. We have seen this before. Every time gas prices go up, Democrats claim there is nothing they can do about it. Then they propose something completely counterproductive just to quiet their critics. This time, it is a tax increase. That is the Democratic response to high gas prices--a tax hike.

Well, the first thing to say about this proposal is that it will not do a thing to lower gas prices--not a thing. In fact, raising taxes on American energy production will increase the price of gas. Oh, and it would also make us even more dependent on foreign sources of oil. Now, that is not my view. That is the view of the independent Congressional Research Service, which concluded in March that the Democrats' proposed tax increase on energy production would ``make oil and natural gas more expensive for U.S. consumers and likely increase foreign dependence.'' It sounds like a brilliant strategy to me.

Beyond raising taxes, Democrats insist there is nothing they can do about gas prices, but I think most Americans feel differently. I think most Americans believe it is time to stop talking about what we cannot do and start talking about what we can do. If the President and Democrats in Congress are truly serious about lowering gas prices and making us less dependent on foreign sources of oil, here are a few suggestions.

First, if ever there was a moment to develop our resources here at home, it is now. For decades, Democrats have resisted efforts to tap our American resources. Then when gas prices go up, they tell us how many years it would take to get the product to market. It is time to take this excuse off the table by breaking the cycle.

Second, Democrats need to allow energy companies to cut through the bureaucratic redtape that prevents companies that are authorized to explore here from getting to work and putting thousands of Americans back to work.

Third, they need to stop penalizing America's producers with new fees and threats of tax hikes, which only drive energy companies overseas and help our foreign competitors and create jobs in places such as Venezuela. And they need to call an end to the anti-energy crusade of the EPA.

In short, Democrats need to throw away the old playbook--throw that one away--and face this crisis with a new kind of creativity, independence, and common sense that the American people are demanding.

Democrats need to stop deflecting attention from their own complicity in our Nation's overdependence on foreign oil. They need to stop paying lipservice to the need for American exploration while quietly supporting efforts to suppress it. They need to end an approach that has not changed, frankly, since the days of Jim Carter. Just like Carter before them, today's Democrats are using the crisis of the moment as an excuse to push their own vision of the future with a ``windfall profits tax'' on energy companies. And just like Carter before them, they have rightly been accused of bringing a BB gun to the war.

This is a serious crisis. It is time for serious solutions--solutions that create jobs instead of moving them overseas, solutions that decrease our dependence on foreign sources of oil rather than increase it, solutions that offer relief rather than mere rhetoric.

Mr. President, I yield the floor.

Mr. President, in the midst of all our other business, I would like to just pause and take a moment to recognize the outstanding work of Jody Hernandez, who left us yesterday after 16 years of dedicated Senate service. Jody came to Washington, by way of San Antonio, after graduating from Vanderbilt University. Over the years, she has lent her talents to the Republican Policy Committee, the Budget Committee, and with Senator Don Nickles on and off the Hill. David Schiappa convinced her to come back to the Senate in 2005, and she has been an indispensable part of the Senate floor team ever since. Whenever any of us had a question, she had the answer. She has been a friendly and welcoming presence in the cloakroom, regardless of how long her day was. She has been a tremendous help to every one of us. And we will all miss her. But we are all delighted that she has found her partner in life, and we wish her and her new husband, LCDR Glenn Wright, U.S. Navy, many years of happiness and every success as they begin their life together. Jody and Glenn met on a church trip to Israel in October and recently tied the knot. So I am sure many adventures lie ahead. We thank her for her good cheer, her professionalism, and her service.

Mr. President, normally in opening the majority leader goes first, but he and I have never viewed this as a contentious process. So since he is not here, I will go ahead with my statement.

Mr. President, when it comes to the state of our economy, the American people have seen enough choreographed rallies on factory floors and speeches that sound good but lead to nothing.

After 2 years of chronic joblessness, they want results.

And that is why we have seen a growing consensus in Washington over the past few weeks that something serious must be done about our Nation's debt.

Even Democrats now admit that failing to bring down the debt would be far more damaging to our Nation's economy in the long run than failing to raise the debt ceiling. The situation has been described as the most predictable crisis in American history. People on both sides of the aisle now realize that the warning bells are too loud to ignore. And last month, President Obama himself made a crucial admission.

In a sign that he too is starting to worry about the prospects of inaction, the President said that failing to produce a serious plan for tackling the deficit and the debt could be a bigger drag on the economy than anything else.

So more and more people see the problem. Now the challenge is achieving a result.

And that is why I proposed a few basic principles yesterday that I believe could guide us to success.

This morning, I want to reiterate those principles ahead of the meeting at Blair House.

By setting out clear principles up front, we are far more likely to get somewhere. And to prevent this crisis before it strikes.

First: It is time our friends on the other side stop pitting one group of Americans against another. Solving this crisis will require all of us working together. Let's act like it.

Second: The level of spending that Democrats want to maintain just is not possible without raising taxes on the middle class, which we know is not going to happen. We are only going to solve this crisis by admitting up front that we have a spending problem.

Third: Entitlements need to be a part of this discussion. So let's drop the scare tactics and work together on reform. Nobody is talking about taking anybody's Medicare.

Fourth: Raising taxes is the last thing we should be doing in the middle of a recession. What's more, a bipartisan majority here in the Senate opposes it. So let's set that idea aside and find some common ground instead. If we recognize these things, we can avert this crisis. If we do not, we will not. And I assure you we will all answer for it.

Very few people saw the last crisis coming. This one, on the other hand, is clear as day. Failing to work together in good faith on a solution is completely indefensible. Everybody agrees

this is a crisis. More people, including the President, agree that failing to address it would be disastrous for jobs and the economy. And everybody knows the upcoming debt limit vote is the best opportunity we have to do something about it.

So what are we waiting for?

Doing something meaningful about the debt is the centerpiece of any serious jobs agenda in Washington.

Other things will help on that front. And the President made a small but important step in the right direction yesterday by announcing he was ready to begin talks on a free trade agreement with Colombia, something we have been calling on him to do for years.

Ratifying this agreement, along with other agreements with South Korea and Panama, will open markets to U.S. goods and create thousands of jobs. It was just one of the ideas Republicans included in a comprehensive jobs agenda we released this week, an agenda that focuses on expanding opportunity, lowering costs, and clearing away bureaucratic barriers to growth.

But at the top of our list of the things we need to do to create jobs is bringing down the debt. If we can not get spending under control, we will never get the economy moving.

If the economy does not grow, we will not be able to reduce our deficits and our debt.

And if we do not reduce our massive Federal debt, we face a crisis that makes the financial panic of 2008 look like a slow day on Wall Street.

So this debate couldn't be more important to our near-term and long- term fiscal health.

Everyone has a stake in this debate. If we face up to it like adults, we will not only prevent this most predictable crisis, we will help preserve our way of life. And the best part is no one side will be able to claim the credit. This is the moment. We cannot let it pass.