Floor Statements

Madam Chair, I rise to claim the time in opposition to this amendment and reserve my ability to object.

I know there are many sewer projects all around this country that need funding. There are two that have been already authorized through the Water Act of 2007 that are in my district that we are trying to find funds for. But what I have an objection to is, we are continuing to build greater and greater debt for our children across the country, and not only our children, but our grandchildren. I think their standard of living is going to be much lower than ours today if we don't stop this borrowing of funds from our grandchildren.

We see budget after budget that continues to increase the Federal debt, and we have just got to stop the spending. We are spending too much, we are taxing too much, we are borrowing too much, and at some point we have got to stop that, because our grandchildren are going to pay a very heavy price for us doing so. So I call upon my colleagues on the Democratic side for us to work together to try to find some ways to bring forth these worthwhile projects, but to stop borrowing from our grandchildren and our children. It is absolutely critical for the future of this Nation that we do so.

The Democratic budget that has been presented by the administration does nothing but increase the debt, and we have got to stop it. It is absolutely critical for the future economic well-being of this Nation. Republicans have presented many, many ideas that have not been considered by the leadership of this House nor by the Senate nor by the administration. I call upon my Democratic colleagues to work with us, to consider the things that we bring forth as potential solutions to the economic woes we have as a Nation.

American people are hurting. They are hurting tremendously. We are hurting small business, which is the economic engine of America. We are taxing and we are overregulating them, and we have got to stop it. We have got to build a strong economy in America, and just stop this idea that we can spend more and more money. Consequently, I have objections to continuing to build greater debt for our Nation.

So I call upon my colleagues on the Democratic side, let's work together, consider alternatives, consider ways of solving this economic crisis we have as a Nation, and not continue down this road that I believe is going to lead to not only lengthening the recession and deepening the recession, but, as Warren Buffett just said yesterday and the day before, off the cliff. And I think we may very well be headed to a deep depression, deeper than we saw even in the thirties, if we don't stop the spending that we are doing here in this Nation.

So I call upon my colleagues on the Democratic side, please, let's work together. Let's find some commonsense solutions to these economic woes that we have as a Nation, and do some things for the American people, not for government. Government is not the solution. The private sector is the solution. Small business is the solution. We have got to find those solutions that make sense economically for this Nation. Socialism never has worked, never will work, and it won't work today.

With that, I withdraw my objection, and I yield back the balance of my time.

Would the gentleman yield?

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

I understand this is an authorization. There is no question in my mind what this stands for. And, frankly, in my opinion, we have spent too much money not only since we have had a Democratic majority in the House and

the Senate, but also the previous administration.

Madam Speaker, El Salvador is a good friend and ally of the United States. After we suffered the attacks of 9-11, most Salvadorans kept us in their prayers . . . But one group felt differently.

The Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN), an extreme left-wing party, issued a communique that the U.S., for its policies, was itself to blame for being attacked. The U.S. Embassy publicly denounced the FMLN's declaration.

Four days after 9/11, the FMLN had a march in their capital city to celebrate the attack by Al-Qaeda and to burn the American flag. The leader of that march was Salvador Sanchez Ceren, who today is the FMLN's candidate for Vice President. The FMLN political party in El Salvador supports designated terrorist organizations, such as the FARC and State Sponsors of Terror, such as Iran and Cuba.

The FMLN has a long history of hostility towards us. If the FMLN should take power in El Salvador, it will be urgent for Congress to review our policies in order to assure the national security of the United States. Under current law, the election of a pro-terrorism party in El Salvador would have real consequences. Since the 9/11 attacks, the U.S. has enacted stronger tools to fight terrorism and those who funnel money to support it.

I want to make clear that these actions would not be punitive; they are not meant to chastise Salvadorans, but the U.S. will not aid sponsors of terrorism. We have an obligation to protect the U.S. and our citizens against those seeking to do us harm.

Mr. Speaker, hardworking Americans are the economic engine that drives this great Nation. And America's economic engine doesn't run on pork.

Even though we are in a recession, Congress continues to take hard- earned tax dollars and send them toward pork projects like tattoo removal, Mormon crickets, and studying pig manure. In fact, the omnibus bill sent to the White House last night contains nearly 8,000 earmarks, costing taxpayers more than $11 billion.

Monday night I had a telephone town hall with my constituents back home in Georgia. One caller, Mr. John Ahern from Athens, hit the nail on the head with his question on spending: ``Why aren't politicians held accountable like families and taxpayers?''

Why indeed? There are Members on both sides of the aisle that are so used to the spending of yesterday that they cannot bear the thought of tightening their belts today. How are we going to justify picking the pockets of taxpayers to literally pay for pig poop?

This bill spends too much, taxes too much, and borrows too much. I urge a veto of the ominous omnibus bill and its 8,000 earmarks. There are John Aherns all over this country who demand accountability in government. A veto would give it to them.

John Locke, the great political philosopher, stated that ``the preservation of property is the reason for which men enter into society'' and that ``no government hath the right to take their property, or any part of it, without their own consent, for this would be in effect to leave them no property at all.''

Our Nation is facing an economic crisis. Yet Democrats are forcing this Chamber to rush through the omnibus, or should I say ominous, lands bill today that will increase government spending by as much as $10 billion and permanently lock up tens of millions of acres of the people's land.

The Federal Government already owns over 650 million acres of land that it can't take care of. The National Park Service alone faces a backlog of $9 million worth of projects that need to be funded. If S. 22 were to pass, there will be more wilderness acres in the United States than the total amount of developed land. It is a huge attack on people's rights and especially property rights.

It is not the role of the Federal Government to hoard massive amounts of land, and I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on S. 22.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 224. Improving math and science curriculum in our schools is great and admirable, as well as an absolute necessity, for our undertaking as Nation, and it is one that is long overdue. While our students have continued to improve in these fields over the course of the past few years, America is still being outperformed by students in many other countries.

This is not a problem that can be simply fixed by this resolution. Nonetheless, every step must be taken with an aim to addressing this shortcoming in our school systems, and this resolution is undoubtedly a part of that. So I appreciate and thank Chairman Gordon and Ranking Member Hall for bringing this important piece of legislation to the floor in the hopes of drawing even more attention to an area of critical need in our Nation's education system.

For our children and grandchildren to be able to compete in a global world, we must refocus on math and science and inspire our children in these fields at an early age, and House Resolution 224 helps us to do just that. Therefore, I support this resolution and the goals and ideals that it means to attain, and I urge my colleagues to do the same.

I want to congratulate my dear friend from Tennessee (Mr. Davis) on his remarkable opening remarks, and I want to associate myself with those remarks.

Math and science are absolutely critical for us to be able to compete in a global economy, to be able to compete against nations all over this world. We are lacking in math and science; we are lacking in the subjects that are so critically important to this Nation for us to have our children be able to compete in that global economy.

As a physician, I believe in science, of course. But it is much more than that. We have seen a degradation of the quality of education of our children. No Child Left Behind has been an absolute disaster. In fact, I have talked to educator after educator for the last several years since I have been here in Congress or running for Congress, and I have not found one who likes No Child Left Behind, because teachers are having to teach to the test, having to teach to these national standards, which have led the teachers away from actually teaching kids how to think, how to calculate, how to utilize the scientific method to investigate new things. This resolution helps to place a focus upon that, to help us to bring forth science as being a critical issue for our Nation. And it is a critical issue.

I would like to see No Child Left Behind go away. I would like to see us stop teaching in schools things that are not as important and things that should be taught at home in intact families. So we need to rebuild families and encourage families to do that, instead of continuing this huge leap to a welfare state, a huge leap towards bigger government, a huge leap towards removing responsibility for the individuals and building a bigger government, a bigger socialistic society.

We need to empower teachers, we need to empower educators at all levels to teach math and science, English and history. We need to have English as the official language of America. We need to have the basic tenets of education, reading, writing, arithmetic, science, history, English, be absolutely the important focus of education in America today. This bill focuses on one part of that that we need to bring forth, and I gladly support this House resolution.

I thank my colleague from Tennessee for his remarks, and I do associate myself with those remarks. They were great. With that, I encourage every Member of this body to support this resolution.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of House Resolution 67. This resolution recognizes and commends NASA, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and Cornell University for the success of the Mars exploration rovers, Spirit and Opportunity.

By almost any measure, the Mars exploration rovers have been an extraordinary success. These rovers, named

Spirit and Opportunity, were originally intended to perform a 90-day mission on the hostile surface of Mars. Spirit was the first rover to land on the Mars surface on January 3, 2004. Spirit was joined on the Martian surface by Opportunity 3 weeks later on January 24, 2004. From the very early phases of the mission, these rovers have exceeded even the wildest expectations of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory team that designed and built them.

Originally intended to perform a 90-day mission to search for evidence of water and other conditions that could have supported life on the harsh surface of the red planet, they have now exceeded that goal by over 1,800 days. Along the way they rewrote our knowledge of the Martian environment by discovering and verifying geological evidence of ancient Martian environments where hospitable conditions may have existed.

While on Mars, these rovers have explored over 21 kilometers of Martian terrain, survived dust storms, mechanical difficulties, and endured three cold, dark Martian winters. The advanced scientific instruments deployed in conjunction with Cornell University have relayed over a quarter million images, including evidence of explosive volcanoes and subsurface water.

At a time when Americans could use some good news, it is fortunate that we can recognize and commend the men and women of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Cornell University for their outstanding success in designing, developing, launching and operating the Mars Exploration Rovers.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to my good friend whom I respect tremendously, Mr. Dreier from California, as much time as he may consume.

(Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I thank my colleague from Tennessee and my colleague from California. We are, as Republicans and Democrats, coming and talking about something that is extremely important, and that is science exploration of Mars and what Spirit and Opportunity have done there. We talked on the previous bill about math and science and how important it is that we go forward with these types of projects. And it absolutely is critical for the future of our Nation that we do so.

The other things that are critical for our Nation that we need to explore is how to stimulate our economy. And the best way to stimulate our economy is by stimulating small business. Small business is hurting today. It is hurting terribly. The American middle class and the workers of America are hurting terribly.

We have proposals brought forth to this floor in bill after bill that markedly increase the size of the Federal Government. This is what I call the steamroll of socialism being shoved down the throats of the American people.

We have to find solutions to this economic problem we have in America. And building a bigger government, building a more socialistic government, is not going to create jobs. It is not going to bring about the things that we need to get us out of this economic downturn.

I hope that as we work together on this bill, and as we did with the previous bill, that we can work together, Democrats and Republicans alike, can come and find some commonsense economic solutions for America, commonsense solutions that will stimulate the real economic engine of America, and that is small business.

Small businesses create most of the jobs in America today. We have proposals that are going to take away jobs from small business because it is going to put a heavier regulatory burden on that small business. It is going to put a heavier tax burden on small businesses. We have seen proposals in the budget that will increase taxes on what is described as the wealthiest in America.

But most of those tax increases will affect small businesses, and it is going to rob jobs, rob jobs that are critical for the economic well- being of America.

Small business is the economic engine that pulls along the train of economic prosperity in America, and we

need to stoke the fires of that train so it has the ability to create jobs, to bring us out of this economic downturn.

What I see over and over again are policies that are being suggested that are going to rob small business of those critical assets that they need. They are going to rob the American people of the jobs that we need.

Government does not make one single nickel, not one single penny. All it does is it takes away from the private sector. We have policies that are taking away from the private sector and increasing a bigger and bigger government to tell us how to live our lives. It is robbing the private sector of necessary funds that are absolutely critical to get us out of this economic downturn.

We cannot continue down this road toward a socialistic society with socialized medicine that is going to destroy the quality of health care. It is going to be extremely costly. It has been said very often around here that if you think health care is expensive today, wait until it is free. It is going to destroy the innovation that is absolutely critical.

So as we commend NASA, the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and Cornell University on this outstanding scientific accomplishment that they brought forward with Spirit and Opportunity, we need to look beyond that and we need to look in a bipartisan way. We have got to stop what I think is an idiocy of destroying small business and creating a bigger socialistic government.

We have seen bill after bill that spend too much, tax too much, borrow too much. Our children and grandchildren are going to live at a standard that is much less than we have today if we don't just stop this, and I am struggling for a word here, but one where we are bringing forth policies that are absolutely adverse to what this country was founded upon. We stand at a crossroads, and it is a crossroads that will lead one direction towards socialism and total government control, and another direction which leads toward freedom, entrepreneurship, innovation and economic security.

So I call upon my colleagues on the Democratic side, let's work together. Let's work together to find policies that make sense. Let's work together to find commonsense market-based solutions that will stimulate small business, that won't hurt our children and grandchildren like bill after bill that is being proposed and a budget that is being proposed. We have to stop this direction, this steamroll of socialism that is being driven by Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid. It is a steamroller of socialism that is being shoved down the throats of the American people, and it is going to strangle the American economy. It is going to kill the American public economically.

So as we applaud these scientific endeavors, I call upon my Democratic colleagues to work with us in a bipartisan way so we can find economic solutions that are so drastically needed, so that we can find the solutions that America needs.

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

Mr. Speaker, our health care financing system in America is broken. We have the best health care system in the world, but the financing system is going to degrade, and it's going to wreck the quality of health care if we don't do something about it.

I come before you this evening and talk about this issue that is of vital importance to everyone in this body and every American, and that is health care.

The new administration has stated that health care reform is going to be their main priority for the rest of the year, and I applaud the administration for undertaking this ambitious endeavor to finally reform this broken system of health care financing.

Our current health care system, with a reliance on third-party, or employer-provided, insurance, is a relic of World War II. As time marches on, we are finding that individual patients, which should be the primary concern of any health care system, are being relegated to the back seat in the decision-making process, leaving it up to their physicians to try to obtain payment from insurance providers, with varying degrees of success. In fact, insurance bureaucrats, both government and private, are currently making health care decisions and are already rationing health care, and these folks are not even medically trained.

Instead, if true health care reform is to be at all successful, we must refocus our efforts on putting patients front and center in all decisions that relate to their health. The patient and the physician should be deciding the best course of action as it relates to the patient, just as the patient should be the main arbiter with their insurance provider. Once people are finally allowed to assume responsibility for their own medical well-being, they will be able to demand upfront an explanation of charges for potential tests and procedures. Only in a fully patient-centered system can we bring the market forces of accountability and transparency into the health care system that exists in other areas of our economy.

I envision a way in which we can build a vibrant health care system in our country, where physicians are free to practice medicine without the massive government burdens that our current health care system weighs them down with. Our new system will still have a vital place for a third-party payment structure to cover extraordinary or even catastrophic procedures. But the basic tenet must be simple and straightforward: The patient must always come first, and the patient must ultimately be responsible for their own health care well-being.

The task set before us is enormous, but it is attainable. Failure is not an option, but a fate worse than failure for the future of our country and its people is absolutely making the wrong choice.

I cannot stress this enough. Our country's health care system must not follow the ill-advised example of other western countries, specifically France, England, and Sweden, with an utter reliance on the government to provide health care for every individual. This is socialism in its most basic form and is directly responsible for burdening these countries with such massive financial obligations that the only remedies are radical changes and cuts or bankruptcy. Not to mention that the standard of care that these countries provide is an inferior one.

True, our current health care system is rapidly going bankrupt and bankrupting every American in the process. But we spend 2\1/2\ times more money than any other country in the world right now. Just imagine how much we'll spend if we follow Europe's lead and totally socialize our health care system.

So we must not follow their reckless example as we work to change our own health care financing. But we must not waver either in the face of this enormous task set before us. And make no mistake about its enormity.

I have never encountered a problem, except for national defense, where a solution from the government has turned

out better than a solution from the private sector. That said, we should not stand for trading in government bureaucrats for insurance company bureaucrats. I cannot stress this enough: The ultimate decisions must be in the hands of every individual patient. Physicians should be in charge of explaining the benefits and risks of each and every test and procedure to the patients, and the patient will decide how to proceed. When necessary, the patient will consult with their insurance provider, seeking guidance about extraordinary procedures or hospital stays or whatever is required.

We must take steps to change our health care system, but socialism is not the answer. Let's work together to find solutions that are patient- focused and not government-focused.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

As a medical physician, a medical doctor, I'm certainly concerned about my patients, and I can understand people who are in wheelchairs wanting to walk again. I understand people who have Parkinson's disease wanting to not have the rigidity and shakes that they have with that disease and the degradation of their lifestyle that that horrible disease causes. And I, as a medical doctor, want to find cures for these diseases as well as many others.

But as we look at this issue, I don't think there's a single person with Parkinson's disease or a single person that's in a wheelchair that would be in favor of killing another human being so that they could walk again or so that they wouldn't shake and have the rigidity and all the devastating effects of Parkinson's. I don't think there's a person in this country, in this world, who would say ``I'm in favor of killing this 2-year-old little girl or this 6-year-old little boy so that my disease will be cured.''

But the facts are very simple. When we do embryonic stem cell research, we're killing human beings. That's a separate human being. It's a separate entity. And that person has the right to live just like you and I do. We can't forget that. These are people. They may be a one-cell or just a few-cell human beings, individuals, but they are still distinct human beings that have their own genetic makeup, that have their own ability to live if we will just put them in an environment where they can.

Now, I've got a friend at home that says that we ought to be able to take our 13 year olds and put them in the ground and dig them up when they're 25 and they'd be a whole lot better. And there are some parents who threaten to kill their teenage children, but they wouldn't really. But the thing is we are killing people. We're killing human beings.

And the unfortunate part of this whole discussion is there has been virtually zero, zero, very little, if any, positive results from killing these human beings, bringing about the research on these human beings. There has been very little. Whereas with adult stem cells, with germ cells, we see a tremendous promise. And just as you said, Congressman Smith, the President has put politics and the radical pro- death abortion groups in this country ahead of science. It is a mantra of death and destruction.

I don't see things as being in the gray area, particularly on this issue. You're either pro-death or you're pro-life. You're pro-abortion or you're anti-abortion. I have wondered frequently whether this whole issue about embryonic stem cell research was just a mechanism to try to give credence to the abortion industry, just to try to give credence to being able to take that right or at least the designation of personhood away from these human beings that are just one or two cells.

I introduced a bill called the Sanctity of Human Life Act that gives the right of personhood to one-cell human beings. And we have got to stop the killing in America. God commands in Proverbs to speak up to the speechless and the cause of those appointed to die. Congressman Smith for years and years and years has been coming to the floor and introducing legislation and speaking up for those innocent human beings that are killed through abortion, killed through embryonic stem cell research, and we have got to stop it. God cannot and will not continue to bless America while we're killing 4,000 babies every day through abortion. We must stop it and do everything that we can. And stopping embryonic stem cell research is also extremely important because these are human beings that God has created. He tells us in His Word that he opens the womb and He closes the womb. I believe in the depth of my heart as a physician that he allows those human beings to be formed, even in a petri dish, and we need to protect them. We need to protect the beginning of life; we need to protect the end of life.

When I graduated from medical school from the Medical College of Georgia in 1971, I made a pledge. It's an oath. It's called the Hippocratic oath. They don't give that in medical school, I don't think, much anymore, if ever, and the reason they don't is because of the abortion industry, because in that pledge, in that oath, it says I will not do an abortion. It also says I will do no harm. Embryonic stem cell research kills a human being. It does harm, and physicians who are doing that are breaking their Hippocratic oath if they take it seriously. It's not a legal document. It's just something that those of us who believe in doing no harm, who believe in rendering good to our patients and trying to preserve life, that's exactly what we try to do; so we must stop this heinous, and it is heinous, practice of destroying human life. No matter how good somebody paints the picture of this procedure, they paint a picture that has not been true, that it's going to bring about all these good cures, but it's an empty promise. And those who cling to it have been sold a bill of goods. They have been sold a bald-faced lie. It's a lie of a promise that has not shown to have any promise really. There are other research methods, other scientific methods, where we can put money, we can put effort to bring about the critical cures that we need to help people get out of their wheelchairs, to help cure cancer, to help cure diabetes, to help cure all these diseases that are absolutely critical for us to cure as a Nation, and we need to put our focus where it should be, and that's not on killing people. And that's what embryonic stem cell research does. It kills people. Put it on the things that will save people, things that will cure their disease, hopefully get people out of their wheelchairs and walking, help them to live their lives and be productive in society. I'm all for that, but I am totally against killing embryonic human beings just for the sake of medical experimentation. We must stop it, and I will do everything I can, and I join Congressman Smith in his efforts and I applaud his efforts over the years.

I just greatly appreciate all that you've done, my dear friend. And, Chris, I just want to join with you in everything that you do to try to stop this heinous practice of killing human beings through abortion, through embryonic stem cell research, and all the other things that you have so valiantly fought against all these years. I thank you.

That's right.

The reason that the pro-abortion people don't want ultrasound is because moms look at that baby and they say, ``That's a baby. That's not just a little glob of tissue. It's not some amorphous goop that's there in my womb. It's a baby.'' And it is. And before she ever knows that she has missed a period, I mean by the time she has missed a period and goes a little bit further, that baby already is developing neurological function. It's already developing a heartbeat. It's a human being.

And that's the thing about embryonic stem cell research goes back to the same thing that I mentioned and what you are talking about, and what we all talk about who are pro-life, that life begins when the sperm cell enters the cell wall of the oocyte, the egg. I call it spermatazoa, that's a medical term for the sperm cell, enters the cell wall of the egg, the oocyte.

It forms a one-cell human being that's genetically different from the mom. It's a separate human being. It has everything it needs except for just a good place to live, to become a human being and be a Member of this House of Representatives, to grow up to become a President of the United States. And it's a human being, nonetheless.

It's a zygote, which needs to have the right, under law, of personhood. And, in fact, in the Roe v. Wade decision, as you know, as all of us who are pro-life know, the Supreme Court justice who wrote the majority opinion, Justice Blackmun, said in his decision, that if we could ever define the beginning of life at conception--now I say ``fertilization'' because the word ``conception'' has become obscured, they want to obscure all this stuff.

But if that could ever be determined that that would vacate Roe v. Wade, we have got to protect these people. A society is going to be judged by other societies about how it cares for the most vulnerable in its society, the poor people, the old people and the very most vulnerable of the young people.

And these embryonic cells that have this big scientific name, like embryonic stem cell research, which sounds kind of lofty, but the bottom line is it kills human beings, separate human beings, and we must stop it and we will do everything we can. God cannot and will not continue to bless America while we are doing this.

We look through history how human beings have been experimented on. We see all the time, we hear complaints, particularly from the other side, even the pro-abortion people on the other side, look aghast of how we treat prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq and just putting women's underwear on those folks' heads.

But, on the other hand, they are willing to kill a human being through abortion, through embryonic stem cell research, and it doesn't matter. The thing that really gets me, Congressman Smith, is they want to do it all the way up to the time that baby totally pops out of the birth canal. In fact, that's what the Freedom of Choice Act is all about. It should be called the Freedom to Kill Babies Act, not the Freedom of Choice Act.

In fact, let me just mention that too as we see that partial-birth abortion, late-term abortions are being promoted by this administration by many in this House. The only medical reason that procedure was ever developed is to guarantee a dead baby by the abortionists. There is no other medical reason, no other medical reason than to guarantee a dead baby.

The abortionists were faced with a problem. They were aborting babies and winding up with a live fetus. Now, ``fetus'' in Latin means ``baby.'' They were winding up with a live baby, and what are they going to do with this? They couldn't have that, so they had to develop those dilatation extraction procedures, partial-birth abortions to guarantee a dead baby.

So I applaud your efforts to try to help bring forth the truth, and that's what you have been doing for years, and I applaud you. And that's why I had to come down here to put in my 2 cents as a medical doctor, to tell the American public that the truth, that there is very little, if any, potential of scientific breakthroughs to treat all these awful diseases, which I want to treat, but there is a light. There is a potential, and it's through other methods that don't kill these babies.

Madam Speaker, As a medical doctor, I can tell you without any doubt that music and the arts have routinely proven to have a positive psychological affect on those with low spirits. All through history we have seen the use of music and dance lift hearts and minds. During the American Revolution and Civil War, music was a way of forgetting the horrors of war. During enslavement, African Americans sang spirituals to give each other hope. And during the Great Depression, there were always music and dance shows to lift the spirits of the ``Forgotten Man.''

Now, in the great city of Augusta, Georgia, the Divine Performing Arts will be displaying their ``amazing'', ``magnificent'', and ``spectacular'' abilities on stage. This group of world-class performers will be presenting the beauty of traditional Chinese art as their way of fighting ``against the negative impacts of the current economic situation and its consequences in the Augusta area.''

As many cities across the world have already witnessed, these performers bring a message of kindness, compassion, and courage, while rousing viewers to help the downtrodden in their community. Certainly, these themes are inspirational and benefit all of the communities that they have visited.

Madam Speaker, I encourage my colleagues to join me in both welcoming and applauding the Divine Performing Arts group to ``The Garden City''. They have shown past success in breaking down cultural barriers, and I hope my constituents in Augusta take the time to appreciate this special performance.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to share with my colleagues a great accomplishment that occurred in my district in the town of Hoschton, Georgia.

Hoschton, Georgia is a classic American town in Jackson County that cherishes a model American history. In 1865, the Hosch brothers founded this town on entrepreneurship and the American dream when they built the town's first store. This small town grew on these American ideals and, among other things, built two banks, a cotton gin, a cotton oil mill, and a train depot. In May 2008, the town decided to strive for yet another milestone--to set the world record for ``the Most Scarecrows in One Location.''

Mayor Bill Copenhaver and life-long resident Robbie Bettis co-chaired the Hoschton Fall Festival Committee that conceived of this challenge. The goal was clear. They needed four thousand scarecrows within the city limits by September 1, 2008. But these great community leaders pulled Hoschton's citizens together and surpassed their goal by 1,441 scarecrows. In less than four months, more than five thousand scarecrows were placed within the city limits. That's more than forty per day.

The Hoschton Fall Festival was then held last year on September 26 and 27 and drew more than 25,000 people who traveled far and wide to view a new World Record. It must also be noted that the other outstanding members of the Hoschton Fall Festival Committee were: Chuck Cope, Chris Hoffman, Theresa Kenerly, Leah Nelson, Nancy Rhodes, John Schulte, Richard Shepherd, Kristen Smith, Lisa Stovall, Ray Vaughn, Tom Walden, and Mark Williams. Furthermore, this great feat received state, national, and international media attention.

I ask my colleagues to join me in honoring this great American town. Its accomplishments show all of America what can be done when a dedicated community works together to meet, and in this case surpass, a stated goal.

Madam Speaker, America is on a road that I believe is going to lead to financial destruction and doom. We are being driven down that road by the administration and the leadership of Congress. In fact, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are driving a steamroller of socialism that is being shoved down the throats of the American public and it is going to strangle the American economy. It is going to kill the American public economically.

Republicans have offered alternatives to these huge spending bills that don't create jobs. They create a bigger socialistic central government. We have plans that will create jobs at half the cost and actually create twice the amount of jobs. We have plans to have a comprehensive energy policy. We have plans that will put America back on the right track to financial security and on a track of energy independence and on a track of the free market system.

We need to get off this road of socialism and get on a road of freedom. I call upon my colleagues in this House to help us to get off the road to socialism and on one towards freedom.

I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

This rule and this bill are both blatantly unfair.

They are unfair to the working poor. They are unfair to the middle class. They are unfair to the community banks that have no blame in this housing crisis, for the most part. What it's going to do is it's going to hurt the people who have been responsible, and it's going to help those who have been irresponsible.

We have solutions. We, on our side, have offered many solutions that would stop this steamroll of socialism. This is another turn of the wheel of that steamroll of socialism that's being forced down the throats of the American people.

We have got to stop this. We have got to stop messing in people's business and hurting the people that this bill is intended to help. It's going to reward those who have been irresponsible. It's going to reward those who have been involved in greed, and it's going to hurt those people who are trying their best to have a home, to have a good value in their home.

We need to vote down this rule, we need to stop this bill. We need to stop this gross infringement on people's rights and privacy and lives that this Federal Government is doing.

We have to stop this steamroll of socialism, and I call upon my colleagues to vote down this rule and to vote down this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today because Americans have bought a product that is not living up to its guarantee. Promises made are not being kept, and the American taxpayer is paying the price for the defective product that they bought.

This body has let the American people down. And I'm not just pointing my finger at the other side of the aisle. Both sides have hoodwinked the American taxpayer for not being fiscally responsible.

If I sound alarmist, it's because I'm concerned that it's only getting worse. I'm frightened about the path that America's heading down with this administration and this Congress in the driver's seat. Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi are driving this steamroller of socialism and, unfortunately, President Obama isn't putting up any roadblocks, and not even a slow down sign. And it's hardworking Americans who are getting run over.

Right now, in addition to a $700 billion bailout of Wall Street, a $1 trillion non stimulus bill, and a $275 billion housing fix, the middle class is also carrying on their backs the auto industry, Bear Stearns, AIG, Citi, Freddie, Fannie and countless others.

For too long, lawmakers in Washington have ignored the pleas from hardworking families and small business owners in their districts. For too long, lawmakers in Washington have depended upon hardworking middle class to pay for their expensive programs, of which they rarely see a dime.

But there is an alternative. The middle class can demand that lawmakers stop using them to pay for policies that benefit only two ends of the spectrum. That's why I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to offer a vision for those hardworking middle class families who pay for the Wall Street fat cat speculators, who pay for welfare recipients, and who pay for all this.

My vision includes providing tax relief to small businesses and families. It includes offering incentive-based relief for job creators. We must skip the pork wish list and, instead, directly stimulate the middle class and small businesses, since they are America's economic engines. In doing so, jobs are created, faith is restored in the markets, and America's entrepreneurial spirit is once again unleashed.

Contrary to what is being said, those of us who oppose the recent actions of this ``Credit Card Congress'' are not just saying ``no.'' Unfortunately, our alternatives to help our economy are not being considered.

I want to give a 5 percent, across the board, income tax cut. I want to increase the child tax credit to $5,000. I want to lower capital gains, dividend and corporation taxes to bring investors back to America that have been

taxed out of the country. I want to create jobs by producing American energy with American workers in the form of solar, clean coal and nuclear energy. I want to increase student loan deductions so that you can send yourself or your child to school at any age, with minimal financial burden.

I want a health care system that is affordable for all people, one that is patient-focused, not government-focused, one where patients own their own insurance policies, one where the doctor/patient relationship is where health care decisions are made, not by some government bureaucrat.

The economic recovery plan that I support includes no bailouts and no pork-laden projects. It creates twice the jobs at half the cost through permanent tax relief for families and for small business here in America. This plan creates 73,000 more jobs in my home State of Georgia alone.

I also offered an amendment to the stimulus to give every American who files a tax return approximately $9,000, their share of the stimulus bill. Clearly, not spending a trillion dollars would have been a much better option, but since Congress was bound and determined to spend the money, wouldn't it have been better to place that money back in the pockets of taxpayers?

If a two-parent family, middle income, middle class family had received $18,000 in the mail, they could have bought a new car, gone on vacation, or even make a down payment on a home.

David McCullough correctly states that, and I quote him, ``History is a guide to navigation in perilous times.''

Let us not forget that in these tough times, that more government has never been a solution. Historically, socialism never has worked, never will work, and it will not work today. In fact, government actions were actually the stimulus that contributed to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac's distension, easy money made available following relaxed interest rates, and ultimately, the push on American lenders to make loans, regardless of the borrowers' ability to pay.

As Margaret Thatcher said, ``The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise in that spirit to remind you that America was founded by pioneers with dreams who worked, and in some cases, died to protect freedom and make a more prosperous life for their children. We must not forget this.

God promises us in Psalm 30:5 that ``Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning.''

Now, I call upon all Americans, young and old, liberal and conservative, to demand a more efficient government, beat back the reach of big government, wipe away the tears of yesterday and demand a joyful morning in America, a future of freedom. America is depending upon it.

Would the gentlelady yield for a moment, please?

I want to congratulate you, Ms. Foxx, for bringing up something that is extremely important. When you opened this evening's special orders, you talked about national defense being the major function of the Federal Government under the Constitution. I carry a copy in my pocket all the time, and I believe in this document as it was intended by James Madison and company.

If you look at this document, if the American people will look at this document, read what our founding fathers wrote, not only in the Constitution of the United States, but read what they wrote in the Federalist Papers, which were a group of essays to explain exactly what this document means. They will see that they've been handed a lie; that this document was never meant to be expanded beyond the 18 things that article I, Section 8 says that we, as a Congress, we, as a government, can do. And the 10th amendment puts a exclamation point upon that, because the 10th amendment says if a power is not specifically given to the Federal Government by the Constitution, in other words, those 18 things in Article I, Section 8, if it's not prohibited from the States, things such as having their own army, things like having interstate tariffs and those types of things, that those rights are reserved for the States and the people. And national defense is exactly the major function under the original intent of this Constitution.

And when we see people stand on this floor and cut down our defense-- I'm a Marine, and I believe in a strong national defense, just like I believe in this document according to its original intent.

I congratulate you for bringing that issue up as you started this discussion tonight because the American people need to understand that this document was never meant to be expanded the way government has-- the way the court has expanded it, the way the administration has expanded it and the way that Congress has expanded it--particularly beginning with FDR, with the New Deal.

That brings us to today. The New Deal did not work. I was taught in school, in high school, that it did work, but that's just a bald-faced falsehood; it's not factual. The New Deal didn't work. The only thing that got us out of that recession, that depression in the '30s and into the early '40s, was gearing up the manufacturing base to supply World War II. So it was small business and manufacturing that got us out of that depression, and we're heading in that direction today in this country, with these bills, one after another, after another, after another.

When the President came and talked to our Republican conference, I'm sure you'll remember he said that the stimulus bill was just the first of many big spending bills, of many socialistic bills, of many big government spending bills that he was going to bring to the floor and promote very quickly. The thing is socialism never worked, never will work, and it's not going to work today, and the American people need to understand what the Constitution says and what we're headed toward. We're headed toward the financial collapse of America if we don't stop spending our grandchildren's future.

So I commend you, Congresswoman Foxx, for bringing up the Constitution, because I think the American people need to understand clearly that this is not a living document. It's a document of which we need to go back to the original intent.

God asked a question in psalm 11. He asked: If the foundation is being destroyed, what are the righteous to do?

What we need to do in America is to start rebuilding the foundations that this America was founded upon, those foundational principles that made America so safe, so secure, so rich, so powerful, and the only great power in the world today. If we leave those principles, then it's going to destroy America, and we're headed toward a depression in America if we don't stop spending our grandchildren's future.

So I thank the gentlelady for yielding me a few more moments, because I am very fearful of the direction we're

heading in this Nation today. We're heading in a direction that's going to be disastrous. We're going to lose what our founding fathers fought and died and sacrificed so much for, and it's up to the American people to demand better. It's up to the American people to demand from their elected Representatives a constitutional government, a limited government, a government that isn't intrusive in their lives.

So I thank the gentlelady for yielding me a few more minutes. I am just so passionate about this. We have got to stop this steamrolling socialism that's being shoved down the throats of the American public. It's going to kill the American economy if we don't do it.

So thank you.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

This rule is totally unfair, and it is a slap in the face to the American family. We are struggling all across America to try to make ends meet, but what are we doing here in Congress? We're growing the size of the Federal Government. The things that are included in this grows every one of these appropriations in whole by almost 8.5 percent, but the American public's budget isn't growing that much.

I presented an amendment to this huge abomination here that would have cut discretionary spending--not military spending, not veteran spending, but discretionary spending--by 10 percent. My amendment was not held in order. I was trying to help the American people, but we're having this forced down our throats. This is just another continued rolling of a steam roll of socialism down the throats of the American people and it's going to destroy our economy.

Just as an example of how grossly growing the Federal Government is, Labor HHS, with what is in this bill as well as what was in the nonstimulus bill just a couple of weeks ago, is growing by 91 percent just for that one department. Labor HHS approps is growing 91 percent. This is totally intolerable.

Just last night, the President stood right there and said he wanted to cut the deficit in half by the end of his 4-year term. We're not cutting the deficit, we're growing government, and it's going to increase the Federal debt. This is intolerable, and this rule should be rejected.

Thank you, my friend. I appreciate your yielding. I want to just make a couple of comments.

One thing, we have a recent experiment in this kind of economic theory. I think if we look historically, not only did the idea of spending more and more money not work during the Great Depression, in fact the only thing that got us out of the Depression was cranking up the manufacturing sector, the private manufacturing sector, to supply the needs for World War II. That is the only thing that got us out of the Depression.

But I just want to remind you, I know my dear friend from Missouri, Mr. Akin, remembers just recently the Japanese tried the same kind of philosophy. I don't think it worked there either, did it?

Thank you, and I appreciate that. Absolutely. I frequently say at home, as I am going around the 10th Congressional District in Georgia, that socialism has never worked; it won't work today, it has never worked in the past, and that is exactly what we are doing.

I described the stimulus bill that we passed here in this House a couple of weeks ago as a steamroller of socialism being shoved down the throats of the American public, and that will strangle our economy and kill the American people economically. I believe, likewise, that we are seeing bill after bill; in fact, just tomorrow we are going to have a housing bill here on the floor that is going to create bigger government and spend more money.

Certainly people need to be able to buy houses. People need to be able to buy cars. The Big Three auto makers are having problems. I have my own dealers at home that talk to me about the car sales. In fact, I visited one and talked to the service people, I talked to the used car people, I talked to the new car people, I talked to the folks across the board, and in a large dealership in the 10th Congressional District back during this last break, a week ago, and they're suffering. People are hurting around this country. And we need to do something. And there is absolutely something that can be done.

Republicans have proposed things that go along with what you're talking about tonight, the supply side, which means that we need to get dollars back in people's hands. We need to have small business be able to have the capital, money, to be able to create a new job, to be able to go out and buy inventory, to be able to do the things that they need to be successful as a small business. And that's the economic engine of America.

I was just watching ``Fox and Friends,'' I guess two mornings ago, and the people there were talking about that the banks are the economic engines of America. They are totally misled. Small business is the economic engine of America.

You've got a great chart here. I know you're going to explain it to our viewers tonight and show pre-tax relief and post-tax relief. And the great thing--I'll stop here in a second, but the great thing about this chart that you're just fixing to explain is it shows that tax relief will stimulate the economy.

By getting the regulatory burden and the tax burden off of small business, we'll create jobs. We'll have a strong economy. People will have good-paying jobs so that they can buy a car, can buy a house, can pay for their college education for their children or technical education, they can do the things that they need, buy clothes, and all the things that come together to create a strong economy.

So if you would explain that chart for us, I'd appreciate it.

Well, you're exactly right, Mr. Akin. And I think we're going to see a marked reversal in job creation as the capital gains tax goes higher. In fact, I'd like to remind my colleague, back when, in the last Congress, Republicans and Democrats alike had an alternative plan to the, what I call the Wall Street bailout bill, the TARP fund bill, the Troubled Assets Relief Program, where we were promoting not only not allowing the capital gains tax-- keeping it from expiring, but we were promoting lowering that, change the accounting principles that froze all the economic markets. And I fault Hank Paulson, Secretary Paulson, frankly, for not even letting our bill touch his lips or come across his throat. And nobody on the majority side would consider our bill.

We had a plan that would not borrow from our grandchildren, like the TARP funds, Wall Street bailout bill did. Republicans have had a plan, actually, for a stimulus that would have actually stimulated the economy when we passed the stimulus bill a couple of weeks ago. And then now, just today, we voted on a bill that I think is going to exacerbate--that's a medical word that means ``make it worse.'' But it's going to make the problem worse for the American family.

In fact, I hope that President Obama will fulfill his promise he made to the American people. He said that he did not want to--he would not sign a bill that had earmarks in it. This bill today had over 9,000 earmarks in it. Last night he said that the stimulus bill didn't have any earmarks in it, and that's not factual either. That's totally false.

Well, thank you, Mr. Akin. I just want to point out something here, too.

As Dr. Gingrey has come on the floor, he and I have the mutual thought that President Obama has promised the American people that he would veto any bill that had earmarks in it. I call upon the President to veto

this bill that we passed today. It has over 9,000 earmarks in it.

Well, whatever.

You don't know what he's going to say. We heard last night that that porkulous bill as you and I call it--I call it a steamroll of socialism being shoved down the throats of the American public. He said last night in his State of the Nation Address that there were no earmarks in that bill. The whole non-stimulus bill was earmarks. It was payback to all of the liberal folks who supported him and who supported our Democratic majority.

But the point I wanted to make is that we hear from our friends on the left that Republicans don't have any ideas or that they're old ideas. The thing is that that's absolutely false in itself. Just on today's bill, I offered an amendment that the Democrats would not take that actually cut the discretionary spending out of this bill by 10 percent. American families are cutting their budgets. They're hurting.

Well, no, they wouldn't let it. Now, the thing is we heard from the leadership on the Democratic side that we were going to have a new era of openness and fairness, but we weren't allowed any amendments. The Rules Committee ruled that this was going to be a closed rule, that they wouldn't accept my amendment or any others. The Republican party had another amendment to just freeze spending across the board, not increase it, just not bring this bill to the floor, just continue to have another continuing resolution to continue current spending for the rest of this budget year. That wouldn't be considered.

We've brought plan after plan, project after project. We've brought forth to the Democratic majority many ideas that would stimulate the economy, that would create jobs, that would leave money in the hands of the people as well as small business, that wouldn't borrow from our grandchildren, but the Democratic majority won't even consider those things, and they've totally shut us out.

On the Internet.

Well, in Georgia, in my part of the woods, we say, ``That's hogwash,'' the claims that we hear.

We've heard rhetoric, both from the President as well as the leadership in this House, about fairness. Well, they're not being fair to Republicans with the closed rule so we can't present our ideas and all.

But the thing is, it's not only not fair to Republicans, it's not fair to the men

and women of America. It's not fair to the working families of America. It's not fair to the small business of America. Because we're being overrun with this socialistic idea that's going to destroy jobs, it's going to create more economic problems, just as we saw during the Great Depression.

All the great spending, all the big growth of Federal Government that we're seeing just markedly grow with these ``porkulous'' bills--the Wall Street bail-out bill, the non-stimulus stimulus bill we had 2 weeks ago, the bill we have today, and we're going to get another one tomorrow, and we're going to see more and more and more. And the thing is, it's not fair to the American people because what we're doing is we're killing our economy.

As a physician, let me tell you, it's not going to. Government regulation is what's driven up the cost of health care markedly.

When I was practicing medicine down in rural south Georgia, as a good example, Congress passed CLIA, the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Act. I had a lab with quality control because I, as a physician, wanted to make sure that any lab test I did was accurate. We spent a lot of time, energy, and money making sure that those tests were accurate.

Well, CLIA shut down my lab. If somebody came in to see me with a red sore throat, had white patches on the throat, running a fever, aching all over, I would do a CBC, a complete blood count, to see if they had a bacterial infection and thus needed antibiotics, like penicillin, or if they had a viral infection. Both clinical pictures could be exactly the same. Even allergies will present with the same clinical picture, even the fever.

So I would do this simple blood test. I charged $12 for the test. CLIA shut my lab down. I had to send my patients over to the local hospital, and they charged $75. I could do the test in 5 minutes. It would take 2 to 3 hours to get the results from the local hospital.

Now, what did that do across the whole of the spectrum of health care? It markedly drove the cost of--insurance and all health care markedly were elevated because of that.

And Congress, not long ago, passed HIPAA. I call all of these things ``critters,'' and if you see a critter coming down the pike, you better hold on to your wallet because it's going to take a big bite out of it. But HIPAA has cost the health care industry billions of dollars and hasn't paid for the first Aspirin to treat the headaches that it's created.

So if we get the regulatory burden off of health care and we let the doctor-patient relationship be how health care decisions are made, we can literally lower the costs. But this ``porkulous'' bill is a giant push towards socialist medical care here in America, too. So it gives me great concern for me and for my physician colleagues, but it even gives me more concern for my patients.

It's been said around here, if you think medicine is expensive now, wait until it's free and provided for by the government. We're going to have terrible quality or degradation of quality of health care. We're not going to have the innovation. We're not going to be developing the new drugs and procedures that we're doing today on the free enterprise system, and it's going to be disastrous.