Floor Statements

Thank you, Representative Wasserman Schultz. It's a pleasure to join with you and Representative Ryan on the floor here to talk about what's happening.

You talked about Representative Ryan's district and mine being about making things. I thought tonight I would share some numbers that personalize it to the 21st Congressional District in New York, the greater capital region. Let's look at some of the numbers.

Beechnut, which produces baby foods, a tremendously powerful economic engine in our Mohawk Valley. Their total jobs right now, new positions, are at 106; 52 in the management position and some 54 in new factory positions. These are workers that will be producing on the line. It is a strength to our region.

X-ray Optical. The X-ray Optical system says that they need to share with the world that throughout this recession they have maintained their workforce. In their order of business, they believe this is a monumental feat.

So we are thrilled that they are able to survive throughout this economic climate without any layoffs, any firings. Certainly the jobs in the capital region are plentiful, or becoming more plentiful. The Albany Medical Center has more than 400 openings, including nurses, technicians and other specializations. General Electric company needs some 200 engineers, researchers and financial analysts. Certainly GlobalFoundries is hiring some 69 people, mostly engineers and technicians. Comfortex has hired 40 people since May and is looking for 15 additional workers.

This time last year the State Labor Department in New York reported that there were some 3,800 registered job openings in our area. Now it's reporting that there are some 6,000 job openings.

The unemployment in the Albany area is down to some 6.6 percent, and just recently 2,900 jobs were added to the regional private job sector this past June. So these are numbers personalized to one congressional district in one State.

As we continue to see this sort of increase in jobs across the country, we begin to understand that the dynamics of the Recovery Act are indeed important. There are those who might bemoan that investment. We stop the bleeding of the recession; and for slightly less than a trillion dollars of investment, we see factors now like $18.5 trillion lost in the last 18 months of the Bush administration in household income that was just lost in that 18-month period. We have recovered some $6 trillion of that household income as a result of the Recovery Act. So when we talk about that, a down payment of under a trillion dollars has recovered some $6 trillion household wealth.

I think that's an amazing return for the dollar. That's an amazing recovery, and so the Recovery Act is not only producing that private sector job growth, as my two colleagues indicated this evening with the chart that they have presented; it's also recovered some $6 trillion in household income and for a down payment, again, of under a trillion dollars. That's a great return.

So I think America is poised for greatness. This cleansing process has been painful; but it allows us to go forward with the sense of commitment to innovation, to a clean energy economy, to the sort of emerging technologies and the innovative genius that is uniquely American.

If we can move forward and take a number of these success stories, success stories in our R&D centers, in our basic research and allow them to be deployed into manufacturing sectors and into the workforce by taking those passions and making the investment that we need to make, we cannot only respond with a jobs agenda but respond to some socioeconomic ills out there.

Our energy crises in this country, several crises under the umbrella of energy, can be addressed by investment in technology, investment in R&D and, certainly, job growth that comes into a new dimension that allows jobs to be created from the trades on up to the PhDs. It covers the full gamut, and I think that's the sort of investment we are talking about here.

We are talking about advanced battery manufacturing. We are talking about smart meters, smart grids, smart thermostats. These are the investments that could be made, people that will install energy efficiency improvements in homes and make businesses more productive, maintaining homes at a cheaper cost by using less electricity and creating jobs in the process.

I am thrilled to join you both as colleagues here this evening because we have a message, we have a great message to share and people need to know. The public needs to know that this investment was made in a very deliberative, laser-sharp focus-type manner that allows us now to begin to see the improvements that are taking hold. Had nothing been done, had the previous administration been allowed its way, we would have seen that straight-line decline continue until we hit the Great Depression.

So I think we are on the right course; we are now bearing northward with that V formation and we are going to continue to grow north to make certain that we continue to grow the private sector economy.

If the gentlelady would yield, you talk about telling statements on the floor or the behavior in and around Washington that proves very telling, actions sometimes speaking louder than words. The activity that has taken place on this floor as it dealt with America COMPETES, here was a major bill invested in by the Science and Tech Committee, a number of groups overviewing this legislation, monumental to the future of America's workforce, to manufacturing, to investment in basic research, in R&D. And there were all sorts of efforts made to hear everyone, to be totally inclusive about that final package that was developed and then presented on this floor, approved in committees and travels to the floor, and then the game of ``gotcha'' politics takes hold.

We use all kinds of stall tactics, all sorts of gimmicks to embarrass, to trap people, to really circumvent the real issue of how do you strengthen manufacturing, how do you put together a package that invests in the research monies that are required. How do you invest in the training of the future workforce, beginning in the educational networks, so that STEM--the science, technology, engineering, and math--concepts can all be learned in a way that will enable us to have the workforce of the future? That effort was so very important. It almost went to defeat. It was pulled as a bill on the floor, and a few weeks later we figured out how to get around the politics spirit that existed.

Yes, I will.

And I think the actions taken by the majority in this House--Speaker Pelosi and members of the Democratic majority--have been about job creation, private sector growth. What I don't think the other side realizes is that what we have out there is middle-class anxiety and uncertainty that's at an all-time high. They're concerned about paying their mortgage. They're concerned about paying for education, for credit card bills that they have, for medical bills. And they are impacted. They are losing jobs through no fault of their own, and now finally they will see hope growing as we grow that private sector situation. That is the dynamic that has really been avoided and not addressed by the minority in this House.

When they asked to have control back--I think what we need to look at is the contrast, and we've mentioned this, Representative Wasserman Schultz, several times over in our frequent visits to the floor. But what we need to do is take the big picture, the big frame here and allow people to see the contrast.

We're looking at a group that drove the car out of the ditch. We towed that car out of the ditch. When the minority in this House was in the majority working with the previous administration, they drove this car right into the ditch and couldn't get it out. And then up comes the new team, and what we have done, working with the President and with the leadership in this House, is towed that car out of the ditch, and now they want the keys back to drive. And we say ``no'' because we need to go forward, not backward. We need to continue to pursue a progressive agenda.

I think when we look at those big picture issues, Social Security-- and where they are with that issue? They want to privatize. They want to put it at risk. Imagine the trillions of dollars that would have been lost had we enabled them in 2005 to have their way. I wasn't yet in Congress, but fortunately the Republicans did not get their way and they did not privatize Social Security. We are now here attempting to keep that out of their wish list of privatization.

They also wanted to voucher out the Medicare program, a very successful program for our seniors. They want to put a voucher system in. We're trying

to keep it and maintain it, develop the security of that system into the future.

They liken our work on Wall Street reform akin to attacking an ant with an atom bomb. Well, nothing could be further from the truth. It's a deception that they're proud of. And a number of other things.

They asked our President to apologize for coming down hard on BP for not responding effectively and efficiently and in rapid pace to make certain that we save our environment in the Gulf States area.

So there are all these snapshots that we need to look at. And there is a contrast. There is a team that wants to go back to the failed policies of the past. There is a team that wants to promote an agenda for the future. I firmly believe that what we need to remind them is that there is this anxiety level, this uncertainty with our middle- income Americans, with middle-class America that is at an all-time high. And they are now beginning to see that there is a difference between the former majority and now this Democratic majority. I think we have a track record of history that will show that when we're in control, we deliver for America's working families. I think that's a record for which we can be very proud and which really speaks to the strengthening of America, her families, and her economy.

Do we have to?

Representative Wasserman Schultz, if you will allow me to just make a comment here.

When you talk about the $11.5 trillion deficit, when the Bush administration ended is when I arrived in Washington as a freshman, several months ago now, in my first term. I distinctly recall that economists of all stripes, from far right thinking to far left, found unanimity in that they thought we needed to invest in solving this deficit situation because the time had long but passed since something like that needed to be done.

The denial under the deficit growth, which became a record proportion, could have been resolved if they had changed their policies, if they had looked at the failure and tried to turn it around. So, by the time the new administration took hold in January of 2009, the requirement was there. It was basic. Every economist was suggesting and was strongly urging that it took investing. So we really had to take additional moneys that drove the deficit a little larger, but it was to stop the bleeding of the recession because the likelihood of disaster was tremendous, so there was no choice but to further invest.

That deficit really drove additional investment requirements, but because of the track record we are showing this evening, it did have its corresponding results. There were lucrative dividends that came from those investments, but they were the smart investments that, yes, grew the deficit slightly, but they finally stopped the bleeding and now show the growth.

If I might add to that, I think also--and history will show--that it was a partnership with big interests. It was with Big Oil, with big banks and with the big insurance industry. In the beginning stages of the Bush Presidency, we saw some of the attempts there for trade contracts, for contracts with China. When we look at the investment, when we look at the job market, it can be broken down into three elements--agriculture, manufacturing, and financial services.

Well, it appeared as though the manufacturing was kind of pushed aside. We didn't see the kind of execution of these trade contracts to favor manufacturing. Instead, somehow, they were

gripped by the special interests of big banks, and they ruled in these contracts that were developed.

So I think that, you know, history will show that manufacturing didn't have a high priority with these groups. When you see the emerging technologies, when you see the innovation, the American innovation, there were many small businesses that were continuing to grow, which could have prospered with the appropriate treatment from Washington--policies, programs, resources--and that just didn't happen. Then we saw the further relaxation of regulation with the financial services sector.

So tools were being developed to intentionally circumvent regulation, to relax regulation--perhaps avoiding an aggressive approach with drilling deeper in the Gulf States. All of this created a failure that brought America's economy to its knees, and it was all about partnerships with special interests--big companies, big industries-- that really had a grip on what was happening here, and it has caused a lot of failure.

Oh, absolutely.

To my colleague from Florida and my colleague from Ohio, I would say this: I believe, the sense I get is that there's a very thoughtful process now to provide the strong incentives to grow small business, to grow private sector jobs, done in a way that really shows respect, respect for the taxpayers' dollar, and wanting to pull us out of this recession that was so deep and so long. And I think it's happening.

I know that the innovative genius will be inspired by the legislative route we're taking, by the priorities we're establishing, with the budget priorities that we have put into play.

And it's about growing jobs. It's about giving people the chance again to feel the greatness of America, the greatness of America that allows us to know that we have it within our potential, we have it within our grasp.

And I firmly believe that we will do our manufacturing, and our jobs will grow in the manufacturing sector because we do it smarter. We do it smarter.

And, Representative Wasserman Schultz, thank you for the opportunity to share with you and Representative Ryan thoughts that I have and that we all share on how we're going down the right course.

Thank you, Representative Garamendi. It is great to join with our Democratic colleagues here on the floor to share our thoughts on how we rebuild this Nation's economy. And it's absolutely the truth that what was inherited here was a huge loss in jobs, 8.2 million jobs lost in the Bush recession and $18.5 trillion lost in the last 18 months in American households of the Bush administration. So there was a huge comeback required.

What we have here is an opportunity, I believe, to really express the strength of this Nation. The strength of our Nation is the intellect. The intellectual capacity of this Nation, when embraced, can inspire a wonderful, wonderful era of innovation, and we have seen it throughout our history.

When we professed that we were going to land a person on the Moon, when we entered the global race in space under the leadership of President Kennedy, we made it happen because people saw the goal. They believed that we were the greatness of America, and that greatness was expressed by a Nation that invested in technology that landed us on the Moon.

So we're at that same juncture. It is a repeat of history almost. As the President asked us in the Recovery Act to invest in basic research, to invest in R&D, in research and development, that allows us to develop all sorts of responses to basic needs.

The energy dilemma in this country, in this world, can be addressed here in the United States. You look at what the investment in advanced battery technology means. I see it in my district. In Schenectady, GE is opening a facility that will manufacture all of this wonderful opportunity where this alternative battery technology will not only allow for generation of energy, but it will allow for heavy fleets to be equipped with alternative supplies that create efficiency, less carbon emission, and a stronger outcome. Job creation, job production, and then beyond that, this battery will be available for storage, for storage of intermittent power.

So, as we look at the sun and the wind and the soil to produce our energy needs, there are concerns at times that there is an intermittent quality, that the sun may not shine, the wind may not blow. If we can store that supply, then we have created the linchpin to an innovation in the energy world. That is happening as we speak, and those batteries will be developed and manufactured here in this country. That's what we're talking about.

Do we want to go from purchasing fossil-based fuels from unfriendly Nations in the Mideast to purchasing solar panels from China? Not at all. We can produce here in this country but it's about choosing the right policies. It's about relying on the right course. It's about placing trust and confidence in leadership.

Do we want the failed leadership that continues to promote the policies of the past where Republicans in this House will stand on the floor and say privatize Social Security, put it to the whim of the investment market? What would have happened if we had transitioned that with the failure of Wall Street? We're talking about a party that continues to talk, continues to talk about providing vouchers for our Medicare system. I don't want to balance a budget on the backs of hardworking seniors who now earn their retirement years. They want Social Security and Medicare to stay intact.

We're talking about a party that said addressing Wall Street reform is like attacking an ant with an atom bomb. Well, what a gross misrepresentation of the dynamics of reform that were required here in this country.

So it's about going out to the past, reaching out to the past and all those failed policies, where a $236 billion surplus which was projected to grow into a $5.6 trillion surplus was destroyed. It was usurped by failed policies. Or do we choose to go forward with progressive leadership, with recovery that we're seeing, investment in our intellect, investment in our innovation, and putting together the resources that enable us to go forward to make it in America again, to manufacture here in the United States?

We have that ability. We have the course established. Let's continue to maintain the recovery walk that is so very valuable to our economy.

I know that Representative Betty Sutton has something she wants to say, and I will yield back, Mr. Garamendi.

General Leave

Representative Garamendi, I like these lightning rounds. I think you are right on to the absolute powerful course to make certain that tax policy speaks in defense of American workers, American families. Absolutely essential, making certain that there is an agenda here to invest in education, because we are training the workforce of the future. But what we also need to do--and I am convinced that we can do it smarter. If we don't do it cheaper, we can still win if we do it smarter.

I look at all of the opportunities that we can do through energy efficiency retrofitting, that we can take manufacturing and upgrade it so that we are creating a state-of-the-art facility. Energy costs are significant in production, in production costs, in manufacturing costs. When I look at the potential of providing, for that efficiency, retrofitting, I saw it NYSERDA. I served as president and CEO at the New York State Energy and Research Development Authority just prior to entering Congress. We saw many, many businesses coming to us to ask for programmatic help, to make their efficiency and on site as powerful as could be.

We need to see that as our fuel of choice. We need to drill and mine for efficiency like you would drill for oil and mine for coal. It is that valuable a resource, and we have invested in that. We have invested in all sorts of innovation in the energy arena through the Recovery Act.

This is a visionary policy-driven administration. The Democrats in this House, led by Speaker Pelosi, working with the President, are visionary. They are bringing about state-of-the-art opportunities. We are bringing into play what was back-burnered by an administration that was too interested in working with powerful sources--big banks, big oil companies, all of the special interests of insurance--working with them, giving them the prioritization in government rather than allowing us to invest in all of the adjustments that were required so that our manufacturing could be as smart and as challenging to the global marketplace as could be. I see that as a value added that's part of the Recovery Act, part of the packaging that we do here.

Another point that I would mention, SBIR, the Small Business Innovation Research program, I have a bill that will invest in tested prototypes that have been tested and are ready to be deployed into manufacturing. We can do that if we create a phase 3 revenue stream. Let's take those patented ideas that have been prototyped that are ready to go into manufacturing. Let's invest in that. That's jobs immediately. It's a no-brainer.

So I would hope that we could advance that sort of small business agenda, because otherwise these patents are going to other countries. They are developing these patents into a manufacturing situation, and that scenario is providing jobs in their given country. We need to take our own patents here to the SBIR program and advance that agenda.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to strongly support our Nation's seniors. The government programs upon which they most depend, Medicare and Social Security, are being threatened by congressional Republicans.

Recently those on the other side of the aisle have been championing drastic changes to both programs. They want to cut Social Security benefits, raise the retirement age to 70, and turn Social Security benefits over to the stock market. They want to convert Medicare to a voucher program so that seniors would get a coupon to go out of their own way to buy a regular, individual insurance policy.

And what do congressional Republicans propose to do with these savings? Certainly, they want to pay for the war. I will not stand for stripping senior benefits down. I will not stand for balancing the budget on the backs of hardworking retirees.

Social Security and Medicare benefits belong to our Nation's seniors, and congressional Democrats will not stand for whittling them down or stealing them away. Social Security represents a promise, and that is if you work hard and pay into the system, you will have financial security in your retirement years.

It's been that way for 75 years. Now is not the time to change it.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I do want to acknowledge the great work done in bringing to focus the importance of Saratoga and its race course and its season to the local economy. I commend my colleague Scott Murphy, the Representative in the neighboring district. While he hosts the track in his district, I know the value to the entire region, to my district economically and certainly to his with this season. It is an important economic engine for the tourism economy. It strengthens our economy; and economic recovery is important, in whatever measure we can ascertain.

Today, I want to join my colleagues in celebration of Saratoga Race Course's 142nd season. Saratoga Race Course, located just outside the southern Adirondack region of New York State, is the oldest organized sporting venue in the country. Since 1863, Saratoga Race Course has been a summer destination enjoyed by many families, racing enthusiasts, and individuals from across this Nation and, indeed, around the world. The history in Saratoga Springs and at the track provide visitors with a window into the vibrant past of upstate New York.

Saratoga Race Course is also the home of the oldest major thoroughbred horse race in America, the Travers Stakes. The Travers Stakes, named after William R. Travers, the first president of the race course, has been exciting patrons since 1864. Travers Weekend, which is one of the most widely attended events at the track, attracts thousands of individuals and families to upstate New York.

Each year, that dynamic is felt vibrantly in the economy, and it showcases Saratoga's rich horse racing history. Today, racing enthusiasts who visit Saratoga Race Course are able to enjoy dozens of graded stakes races and thoroughbred races, in addition to the region's local cuisine and rich history and culture.

I applaud this important venue and the economic engine of upstate New York that it is for the beginning of yet another season of racing.

Again, I want to compliment and commend Representative Murphy for his work on this commemorative resolution. It brings to focus the value added that is instilled into our regional economy with yet another season that will be falling upon us.

Thank you, Representative Wasserman Schultz. It's so encouraging to have people see the difference in how we approach reform here in Washington. There are those who will suggest that the 8.2 million jobs lost during the Bush recession were a tremendous blow to this Nation's economy, to working families, to households across this country. There are those who would suggest that the $17.5 trillion worth of household wealth lost in the last 18 months of President Bush's final stage of his Presidency, some of that's been recaptured, recovered, some $6 trillion.

But that painful outcome is sometimes lost. People forget that there were these trillions of dollars lost to the household incomes, that there were 8 million jobs lost in this country. Why would people want to go back to those failed policies?

And, today, we just do a litmus test based on other dynamics. Medicare, the Republicans suggest that we should voucher the system, allow people to have a voucher to go and invest in a private insurance plan.

There are those in the Republican ranks, the leadership, talking about reforming Social Security, raising the age limit, providing savings so that they can pay for the war, wanting to adjust a system that's very much part of the security for our Nation's retirees. To balance a budget on the backs of our hardworking retirees, people who have invested in the system, is telling us what their philosophy is all about. They're not supporting Wall Street reform. Attacking it, demeaning it, that it was an atom bomb used on an ant, totally misrepresents the situation; the fact that they wanted our President to apologize for coming down hard on BP and the oil spill and the failures in the gulf.

So we see that same thinking that brought about the failure of our economy, that brought this Nation's economy to its knees. They want us to go back to those standards? I think what we have here are improvements. There's a road to recovery. It's painfully slow, but it's moving in the right direction. It's a sweep upward after several months of a sweep downward. The V formation, that constant dip down south, southward with the economy, now transitions upward, has told the story, has told the story; and I see it in my district.

I see the capital region of New York responding to an innovation economy, investing in opportunity, in innovation. Advanced Battery Manufacturing, they're to open a new facility in our district that will move to something that now transitions our economy because it will be able not only to store intermittent power; it will also be able to generate electricity and also be used for heavy fleets. This is the way we create jobs. This is the investment of the Recovery Act that invested in Advanced Battery Manufacturing, invested in renewable technologies for energy generation, invested in smart grid, smart thermostats, smart meters.

These were the opportunities that really transition our economy and create a new day for America because we become more self-sufficient in our energy policy, with our energy policy. We allow for generation to be done here by embracing the American intellect. These are the dynamics of reform that were long overdue. They're creating American jobs to produce American power. A tour with the veterans of this country about American power, about how we can create jobs here and not send hundreds of billions of dollars to foreign-nation treasuries and those nations are unfriendly to the U.S. That's the changed thinking, not the failure of the past that drained household incomes by $17 trillion to $18.5 trillion, that lost 8 million jobs.

Do we go back to those failed policies, or do we transition over to what has been the road to recovery, albeit not as fast as we would like, but it's progress, it's movement in the right direction, and it's innovation and it's embracing the American intellect.

Thank you, Representative Wasserman Schultz, and thank you for bringing us together to discuss an important aspect of the work we do, creating jobs, providing the dignity of work for individuals and families across this great country. And it's great to join with you and Representative Jackson Lee, Representative Schauer. I know we are going to be hearing from Representative Murphy.

But to be with everyone here and put our thoughts into a context that allows people to understand where we are headed with this recovery program, I think this chart expresses it in a very straightforward, simplistic way, a simple straightforward decline for many months, where we lost $17.5 trillion of household income, where 8.2 million jobs were lost. We were headed for a deep, deep depression. And then this sharp straight line upward, which now expresses a recovery.

And I should point out that many of us believe, all of us here on this floor tonight believe, that we're not only recovering the economy, but we're restructuring the economy. That's an important aspect of the work we're doing. To create those jobs that will bring strength to the American worker, provide economic vitality for the American family. And so we see this clustering here of 6 months of recovery in the private sector area of job creation and job retention.

This is an important aspect to the investment that has been made, the policy reforms that have been initiated and responded to by this administration and the leadership of this House. But there is more to come. We're not satisfied with this.

But when we hear the critics from the other side of the aisle say where's that great number of jobs, where are those new jobs, well, we can point to these new jobs. They're there. They're a statistic. They're historic now. Where were you to decry the loss of those jobs? There was silence about the jobs being lost. There's huge contrast in their approach to the jobs. We heard nothing with job loss. Now we're hearing complaints, diminishing, of the efforts to create jobs, especially in the private sector, which is happening.

I think rather than dwell on statistics, and all of my colleagues have done this very well tonight about statistically showing that we're making progress and that we've turned the corner and that there's been a sharp U-turn in the response as a Nation for job creation, but I think we need to put it in the big-picture framework of trust, of competence.

This party, the Democrats, have come forward with a plan of action, one that has saved a lot of effort of further loss, economic consequences for American families. And we know who brought us that steep red line of decline: it was a party that continues to espouse privatization of Social Security, vouchering of Medicare, supporting tax breaks to ship jobs offshore, to call the response to Wall Street reform akin to attacking an ant with an atom bomb.

What a gross misrepresentation. What a gross unawareness of the issues that brought this country's economy to its knees. And so I bring forth that sort of contrast because I think it's what's governing the response today. The positives, the optimism that we share, the reforms we're promoting are swinging us upward. The contrast is that continued effort to further push hard on the middle class, to not allow for Medicare--a system that has worked well for our Nation's seniors--to raise the age limit, the threshold for Social Security. All of these efforts coming, all of this denouncement of Social Security, of Medicare, that has stabilized people in their retirement years, are what they advance and what they promote.

Are you going to trust that thinking, that party, to continually pull us into the red, or are you going to look at Democratic action where we've resisted this sort of behavior, where we are believing we can grow the economy, where we are embracing the theme that we are going to make it in America again? Let American workers know that we're standing for that turnaround.

I most certainly will.

Oh, absolutely. As stated on the floor, we know what people want. We know where they want to take us. And I just think the contrast needs to be shared, because that same thinking is prevalent in terms of economic recovery, of economic development policies, of the sort of stopping of the bleeding that we promoted here in the House by inserting a new order of thinking.

You know, even with the energy crisis, with the devastation-- Representative Jackson Lee, you see it from where you sit, and Representative Wasserman Schultz, you see it from the Florida perspective, Texas perspective--the gulf has been impacted. And for people from the cheap energy voice in this House, coming from the Energy and Commerce Committee, required an apology, demanded an apology from the President for coming down hard on BP. And all of the devastation to the economy, to the people, 11 lives lost, the ecosystem being devastated. That's another sign of difference where there isn't trust, in my opinion, or confidence.

So people, I think, are going to take a look at this and say, Let's continue this. The path out of the damaged zone may not be as quick as we would have liked, but it is happening. It is happening in a positive measurement and its growth in the private sector of job creation for 6 continuous months.

So I just think that contrast is important in the discussion that we have here tonight on the floor of the House.

Mr. Speaker, I think that the President was right yesterday when he called our friends on the other side of the aisle out of touch.

In my hometown of Amsterdam, New York, there are neighbors who are hurting. In some instances, this recession has eliminated nearly half of their retirement savings. Others have lost their homes.

Despite this downturn and Wall Street's recklessness, Republicans still want to privatize Social Security. They want to create a casino economy and play Russian roulette with our hard-earned retirement savings.

Most of the seniors in Amsterdam have worked hard and have played by the rules their entire lives. Social Security, which they have paid into their entire working life, is their crucial safety net and financial security. Let's not gamble it away to appease Republicans, Wall Street, and big banks.

Just a few days ago, the leader of the other side suggested slashing Social Security benefits and using those funds and savings to pay for the war in Iraq and the war in Afghanistan. Enough is enough.

Democrats in Congress are standing up for seniors and fighting to protect Social Security, to create jobs here at home and to support small business as the engine of job growth.

Mr. Speaker, I will continue to fight for seniors because they are deserving of the respect that they have earned.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, the difference could not be any clearer. As tar balls continue to roll onto the beaches of the gulf coast States, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are apologizing to BP for the government's holding them accountable. While they continue to chant ``drill, baby, drill'' and to put forward ideas that benefit Big Oil, Democrats are moving America in a new direction.

I rise today to stand with the families, the small businesses, the communities, and the economy of the gulf coast and our country to say that we can no longer be held hostage by our gluttonous dependence on dirty oil, most of which is imported from our enemies around the world. Instead, we must change our priorities and stand up to special interests by continuing to promote a clean energy economy and to create good-paying American jobs for American families. In fact, 87 percent of Americans support requiring utilities to produce more energy from renewable sources, sources that cannot be outsourced or imported.

A clean energy economy will make our country safer, more energy independent and will create jobs. In the meantime, let's be strong and steadfast and hold BP accountable.

Thank you, Representative Ryan.

You know, the talk about the contrasts, the sharp contrasts between the party in control now in the House, with the Democrats advancing dollars that invest in small business, invest in innovation as an economy, clean energy. You think of all those strategies compared to the catering to Big Oil, big banks, Wall Street, making certain the biggest amongst us are taken care of. I contrast that with all of the work being done in my district, in the 21st Congressional District in New York, in the Capital Region, it has always had a spirit of pioneer. It's in our DNA. We have within the confines of that district an energy revolution of sorts, it's the birthplace of electricity. So we're continuing on with a global center for renewable energy at GE, nanoscience in the district, the semiconductor industry, superconductive cable, talking about advanced battery manufacturing.

When we looked at the Recovery Act and how the President wanted to bring us into the new ages, allow for transitioning, a transformation of the energy economy, that's what this is all about. What we have had expressed in this Recovery Act are opportunities to grow new opportunities with advanced battery manufacturing. The battery looked at by GE, as they're soon to establish their plant, not only provides, in its concept of an alternative battery, not only for generation of electricity, not only for powering heavy vehicles, but also it is there for energy storage, so that with the transmittent energy of renewables, that transmittent nature, the opportunities to provide for storage there creates all new opportunities, the battery as a linchpin. The same is true with superconductive cable, where you can transmit far more electrons per inch of cable compared to the traditional cable, where renewables are being developed and new opportunities with nanoscience to create lighter blades, more efficient outcomes, more power per dollar invested. All of this is what holds great promise for our economy, for jobs, for small business innovation, for the emerging technologies. That's what this investment is all about.

And finally, you see a commitment to small business, to the pioneer spirit, to the invention and creative genius that has always been part of the American culture. So I'm really proud of the efforts that we're making to grow back this economy, to grow back the investments in basic research and R&D. That's what this is all about with the Recovery Act.

I think that people are now looking at this contrast, Representative Ryan, they're looking at the slow, steady progress, that climb upward from what was a precipitous drop in that left-handed side of the V formation. The precipitous drop in jobs, in the growth in unemployment, the lack of investment, the household income loss, now has taken a sharp u-turn, and we see the road to recovery, the progress because of the wisdom of the types of investments made in the Recovery Act promoted by the White House and very much supported by Speaker Pelosi here.

Well, simply said, the policies of the past gave us the catastrophe in the gulf; the policies of the present give us opportunities at home.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today after weeks of outcry for action to acknowledge that BP has caved to pressure, and to discuss yesterday's steps by BP to finally put working families and small businesses ahead of shareholders and short-term corporate profits.

Had BP acted with rigor and integrity from the beginning, we would not be forced into having this conversation right now. However, their shortsightedness has demanded a swift and aggressive response, which the President has provided.

In the short term, we must stop the oil from continuing to spill and subsequently clean up our shores, making BP pay the tab. Our energy future is bright; it is filled with diversity, with clean energy and American jobs for America's workers. Let us heed the devastating message that this disaster sends to us. Let us build the strongest, most powerful and most competitive clean energy economy in the world.

We can and we must rise to this challenge. Our children's future depends on it.

Representative Garamendi, thank you for bringing us

together in this very thoughtful way. It's great to join you and Representative Chu and others who will be participating in this hour of dialogue where we really look in a very laser-sharp, focused way at this very tragic occurrence in the Gulf. Obviously, I think it's important to recognize the commitment made by the President and his administration to make certain that we do everything we can possible to make certain that we stay on this case of cleanup and capping.

Certainly, shutting off that leak of that oil well is incredibly important and the cleanup in that Gulf area that impacts the Gulf States is absolutely essential. And to have the President recognize that we have deployed some 30,000 workers that will be in the midst of that activity, helping, is important; to know that over 5,000 vessels have been solicited and that our National Guard numbers--over 17,500 forces--out there making a difference is important. But let's really look at the some of the situation here.

I really get concerned and joined with some Members in this House to advance correspondence to the BP CEO, stating very clearly with my colleagues that their priorities spoke volumes as to where they rest as a corporation. To have suggested that payments be made to investors as a high priority, be established as a high priority; to suggest that dollars going to marketing go to revamping their image, enhance their image, while we sit there and look for ways to cap this leak, while we continue to make certain that we need resources to clean up the Gulf, that didn't seem to be a very high priority with this company. And so it was, I think, very appropriate for us to respond in very forceful measure to address this strong language in a letter to the organization, to BP management, and state that what you really need to do is re-prioritize to make certain that what comes as the most important, essential bit of work here as you invest dollars--and they best ought to--as you do that, the priority has got to be to cap that leak, to clean up the Gulf, to make certain that we make whole the individuals, the States, the communities that surround that given region; to make certain that businesses are allowed to function again. When we think of the impact on agriculture, on tourism, on the seafood industry, to name a few, the impact on our ecosystem, on the environment, on the wildlife, it is painful to watch the news accounts of this continuing saga of a tragedy. And so their priorities were misplaced and totally insensitive to the needs of people and industries and certainly the wildlife in this given region.

I had stated clearly at a press conference where we aired this letter that it was important for them to not be so concerned about their image but rather deal with the basics. And I said, Before you shore up your image, clean up our shores. I think it's straightforward and easily understood. That's where I would like to see the priorities. And today, after pressure from the President and many of us in Congress, I think the company has heard the message. They have been given this forceful statement, and they are now responding to the pressure by suggesting they are setting up an account that will respond to some of these needs. They are setting up an account that will deal with the compensation fund for oil workers who are out of work because of the catastrophe.

Now, one can only imagine what would have been the outcome, how much less impacting the outcome would have been, if they had embraced the same order of integrity when it came to the technology they should have utilized with the drilling operation. You know, they asked to go 5,000 feet deeper. They want to drill a mile deeper. But the impact of the damage, without the right technology and discipline and regulation, meant hundreds of miles of spread. From that 1 mile deeper, hundreds of miles of impact because of that lack of integrity.

And so I am here with you this evening in spirit and in voice to say that we need to stay on this dilemma, we need to stay on this catastrophe, until all of the essentials are done--the clean up, the capping, the reforms that are essential--and making certain that the dollars, the resources are coming from the source--the source of the pollution here--in this case, BP.

So, thank you, Representative Garamendi, for bringing us together, and it's great to join you and our colleagues here this evening.

Representative Garamendi, listening to Representative Moran from Virginia reminds us of the investment in technology that should accompany this situation. There should have been the checks and balances, and there should have been the investment; as he suggested, a drop-in-the-bucket investment compared to the damages now associated with this catastrophe. I know the people I represent in the 21st Congressional District watch with sadness as they see the news accounts that show us the day-to-day responses with regard to this disaster.

We have heard a lot of talk about alternatives and technology that needs

to be embraced to carry us into a clean energy economy. My region in the capital region of New York State is ripe with that sort of opportunity. It is investing in high-tech opportunities for clean energy jobs, in innovation, energy intellect, energy ideas, energy technology that will enable us to move forward with a progressive agenda.

The fact that we have been held back by slogans and mantras such as ``drill, baby, drill'' have held back the progress. Even the likes of T. Boone Pickens has said we can't drill our way out of the energy crises of this country or the world. We need to embrace that new technology. We need to bring about the type of jobs that will allow for a clean energy economy to take hold, and to make certain that we invest in those subsidies that will take us into renewables like utilizing our sun and our wind and our soil and our water to create and respond to the energy generation that we require. I think that is so very important.

I think we are going to have a sad answer there.

Thank you, Representative Wasserman Schultz. And thank you for bringing us together for this Special Order which obviously will speak to the wisdom of sound policy that breaks from the failed policies of the past.

What is startling is that we should have learned from decades ago that the trickle-down theory simply does not work. It does not work because there wasn't a benefit felt by the working middle class, a large group of people across this country who in many situations live paycheck to paycheck, putting aside money for their mortgage payment, putting aside savings for college for their children, putting aside some reserves for unexpected expenses. That kind of situation must be responded to. And I think the fact that you talk about 98 percent of Americans getting what was now recorded to be historically the largest middle income tax cut in this Nation's history was a big part of the Recovery Act. It is what started to circulate the dollars.

When we look at the economic advice that we got, not only as the House of Representatives, but the United States Senate and the White House, with President Obama and Congress being advised by a team of economists that ranged over the broad spectrum of philosophy in the world of economics, and from the far-right thinking to the far-left thinking, from more conservative viewpoints to the more liberal viewpoints, there were recommendations made by this panel of economists who spoke to the priorities that needed to be embraced by this Nation. The time had more than passed to invest in the recovery for America, and the results are astounding.

When we look at the Recovery Act, we can witness that the bleeding has stopped. The telltale indicators suggest in many cases that there is slow and steady progress, that the bleeding has stopped, and the Recovery Act can be credited for that.

The investments that were made were in three categories: tax cuts, as the representative, the gentlewoman from Florida indicated, a historically large impact, a historic largest middle income tax cut for this Nation. That was shared with the middle income community, the working families of this country.

Next, an effort made for issues like FMAP and education aid that went to States. I know that my home State of New York did extremely well with the Medicaid relief monies, did extremely well with the education investments so that we are able to keep some of the public sector employment situations, from educators to public safety, alive and well, and to allow for those families who were in need of assistance to receive some of the Recovery Act monies. And the unanimity with which the economists spoke in this situation simply was driven by the very forceful thinking that these entitlement situations--the need for food and clothing and shelter in tough times where people were finding themselves without a job through no fault of their own were allowed then to, with dignity, continue forward in these tough times; and they reinvested in the local regional economies. That got the local economies circulating and began the work, the progress of pulling ourselves out of this recession, which was, again, a historic situation as was witnessed by the previous speaker.

And then finally, investments, investments in a way that went to projects that were back-burnered, investments in technology, technology and education, in energy situations, in health care, in all sorts of activities, in transportation and infrastructure, utilizing technology in a way that could

take those issues that were displaced, put onto the back burners were now brought forward by the Obama administration and by the leadership of this House with Speaker Pelosi and others leading us in the votes for recovery. And what happened was that, for instance, in the area of energy, we're creating jobs.

Now, the Representative from Florida, Representative Wasserman Schultz, told us that we're now seeing hundreds of thousands of jobs this year added to the recovery, 84 percent of which, I would point out, are private sector. So that's the way we want to grow the jobs. But how is it happening? It's happening with investment in technology, investment in smart meters, smart thermostats, smart grids that enable to us have more control over our destiny as energy consumers.

That is not only job growth, private-sector job growth, but it is also investing in a way that allows us to be cutting-edge competitive and to provide for a stronger quality of life and for a more competitive edge for our business community.

We also invest in health care with technology, making certain that duplication and mistakes and inefficiencies in the health care system are avoided, and we can go forward with a stronger outcome--a savings, again, for consumers who would have to pay for this duplication and for these mistakes.

Then there is the investment in education so that students are now able to have a stretching of the education resources in the classroom and where they can have a first-class opportunity to think outside their neighborhoods in which they live, where they can be more worldly in the classroom, through technology, in order to witness some of the great things that are happening out there.

This is a great opportunity for us to, this evening, talk about the differences, to contrast the differences out there--the failed policies of the past, Representative Wasserman Schultz, that brought about 8 million jobs lost in a recession. That outdoes the Great Depression. Many of my constituents out there will tell me that they recall the Great Depression, and 8 million jobs surpass that situation.

So we started out in a very difficult situation, and I know that, with the Recovery Act, we are beginning to make progress. We are going to continue to stay on this slow and steady course that will enable us to come back from what was a very deep hole.

Representative Wasserman Schultz, I know that we are joined now by our friend and colleague from the State of Pennsylvania, Representative Kathy Dahlkemper, who, like me, is a member of the freshman class here in this great House of Representatives, who is one of those great additions to the House and who is an enjoyable force with whom to work.

So, Representative Dahlkemper, I know that you wanted to jump in and share your thoughts on our recovery here.

If the gentlewomen will yield, it's interesting. You know, you talk about these observations that have been shared in publications, but as early as April 16, I believe, Fortune Magazine talked about the Recovery Act's working, that the President's policies were having their presence felt. They talked about it as a sharp turn.

Interestingly, if we see the pattern of the retail sales that you presented in chart format, the household wealth recovery chart and this GDP scaling, they all had that same graphic. It's this sharp V formation, that precipitous dive, straight-line dive, from early 2008 into the beginning of 2009. Here is another one on the path to economic recovery and then that slow and steady straight line of recovery.

So, to me, it's blatantly obvious there was this continuation of decline, and you can't help but wonder what would have happened if we had allowed the failed policies of the past to continue or if this President and if this Congress had not stepped up to the plate.

Absolutely.

So we can see these V formations; that downward straight line impact that could have kept going, but we changed directions. And now, we're told by our colleagues in the House on the other side, It's not quick enough. We've made a wonderful recovery here. We have stopped the bleeding, and we're climbing upward. The analogy used by the President, where they drove the car into the ditch, and then it took a tough bit of effort to pull that car out of the ditch, and they're saying, Give us back the keys.

Well, I think the public is now understanding that very failed policies were governing our economy. It brought America to her knees. And we saw the lack of regulation with big business, big banks, Wall Street, credit card companies, big oil. Gosh, we see what is happening in the Gulf. All sorts of big special interests that had a heyday. No regulation. No watchdog in the equation. Let us run free. Let us be in a situation of laissez-faire. Government is bad. No restriction. Let it just run free.

Well, capitalism works, but you also need guidance. You need some sort of measurement, some sort of discipline that errs on the side of the consumer,

the taxpayer, whomever, the small business. And the recovery here is about smart policy. It's about progressive policy. It's about taking what was broken and fixing it.

And, you know, don't stand on the sidelines and say, We're watching you mop; you're not mopping quick enough.

No. Pick up a mop and help us clean up what has been messed up here.

I think the public now is understanding. They're seeing this big oil company that got us into trouble now, is harming the environment, is impacting the economy of the Gulf States. They're understanding now that regulation for certain big groups out there is essential. Regulation for Wall Street was essential. Our work, to make certain that we help the small business community by assisting them with loan opportunities, working with community banks to open up the credit lines; the backbone of our economy, the springboard to our recovery is through small business.

And this was an era that preceded us that was about special interest, big companies, big industries getting all sorts of favorable review and treatment while small business and middle-income America struggled. Struggled to live paycheck to paycheck while greed--greed--predominated on the scene and really brought this economy to its knees and caused undue hardship, unnecessary hardship to folks, ranging from those in their senior years, who had retirement accounts destroyed.

And what do our folks say here on the other side? Privatize Medicare. Privatize the situation for Social Security.

This is a choice here. It's a contrast. It's a difference. Big oil companies, big banks, Wall Street, special interests, give them free rein; or assist the small business community, work for incentives and relief, tax relief for middle-income Americans. There's a contrast here. And it's that V formation. Just as that line went precipitously south, we're now going north. So is the contrast. Sharp and clear. And I think, more and more, the general public is saying, No, you don't get back the keys. You don't deserve to get back the keys to the car.

Well, I don't get to watch TV too much. All of us know we're out in the districts working all the time. But I do understand the concept of a show called, ``Are You Smarter than a Fifth-Grader?'' So we will put it out to the fifth-graders and say, Would you prefer 8 million jobs lost, or would you prefer over a half million, over perhaps three-quarters of a million jobs returned, 84 percent in the private sector category? I think the fifth-grader would say, Give me the job growth, not the job loss. And you go down that list, and I think the fifth-grader is going to tell us that this is pretty clear. It's a contrast that I understand. And it's important. I think it's about choices.

Is it fast enough? We would all love instant response. We would love millions of jobs in one quarter. But after we witnessed $18.5 trillion lost to household incomes over an 18-month span during the Bush recession--that's about a trillion dollars per month lost to household income--to now recover $6 trillion, a 30 percent recovery of that loss, is a move in the right direction. Again, a fifth-grader would say, I'd rather take a $6 trillion gain than an $18.5 trillion loss for households.

So it becomes more and more apparent that the Recovery Act isn't working; that it's about small business incentives, tax relief for small businesses investing in basic research, research and development, embracing science and technology, building a clean energy economy, growing an innovation economy, supporting emerging technologies. These are all dynamics of strength. And the confluence of these dynamics of strength mean a growing economy and one that can base itself on cutting edge in design and format. I think it's a strong comeback, and we need to maintain the course of recovery.

I, by the way, had lunch with one of those.

If the gentleman from Ohio would yield.

Mr. Boccieri, you struck something in me when you talked about the party of ``no.'' Even the party of ``no,'' it was not good enough to say ``no'' to an issue like America COMPETES. On this very floor, we had the opportunity to create millions of jobs through an investment in manufacturing; an investment in STEM, science, technology, engineering and math, for our students out there to train the workforce of the future; to invest in basic research; R&D; to do all sorts of incentives for business. Not only was it not enough to say ``no,'' because we had the votes with the ``no'' votes from the other side. We still had many more votes favorable. But then it was a game of politics to just drop the progress, kill the progress of America COMPETES to the point where the issue had to be resolved through all sorts of negotiations over a couple of weeks. So it held back progress.

It was an intentional game of ``gotcha.'' Here sat in the balcony representatives of labor and representatives from the United States Chamber of Commerce, a broad spectrum of support for a bill that takes America to the cutting edge, allows her to invest in smart manufacturing, and to compete effectively in a global marketplace, to invest in science and technology, to make certain that we're state-of- the-art, that we're investing in research and development, which translates into jobs. All of that activity thwarted by a game of politics on this floor.

It didn't matter--it didn't matter--that nearly 2 million jobs could be created; that we could become a more competitive Nation. That didn't matter. And ``no'' wasn't enough of a force to stop it. So we resort to political games. That's the sort of record that the public will scrutinize, and they will say, Look, we see the slow and steady progress. We believe in this.

To your point, Representative Boccieri, about setting up the goalposts, setting up the parameters for this program, yes, allowing the capitalist model to work but making certain that there's discipline, discipline in the situation and the scenario, so that we go forward and invest and know that we recover with lucrative dividends.

I think mismanagement and bad government are totally unacceptable.

But effective government, sound government where you're investing in a way that will grow back the economy, where you're creating the discipline that was so essential. Just looking at the gulf today, understanding that all of this heartache could have been avoided had there been some sort of discipline where you weren't taking shortcuts to perhaps grow that profit column, where you weren't--as the 97 percent report required, you weren't investing in technology.

And so all across the board we see these situations where it was just, like, run on your own. Don't let anybody control you or discipline you. We will be there. We'll be your friend. You are a big special interest. Now it's like bringing it back, reining it in, and saying, My gosh, look at that $11.5 trillion deficit. That red bar goes so deep on that chart. When we look at that chart, it's so obvious to the naked eye that something had to be done differently. You couldn't continue the failed policies of the past. We would have been in such a deep hole. Again, it was tough pulling that car out of the ditch, but we got it out of that ditch, and I think the contrast now is, Do you give back the keys to the people who drove the car in the ditch? Or do you allow them to go forward and continue the progress? I think that it's a very stark contrast.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

My amendment, to which I would like to speak, encourages the Department of Defense to help develop the next generation of semiconductors. It allows us to embrace the American intellect and put it into an investment towards better outcomes in our military.

These new technologies will focus on scaling. Scaling of processors to the point that the next generation of weapons systems would be lighter, more agile, consume less power, and at the same time be more powerful.

As important as our future weapons systems are, so, too, is it essential for us to maintain our global competitiveness in nanotechnology to achieve both of these goals for the military, and for business creation and innovation. We need to achieve these goals through the Department of Defense and having them critically involved.

This amendment asks the Department of Defense to support the creation of a public-private partnership of defense laboratory scientists and engineers, university researchers, integrated circuit designers and fabricators, tool manufacturers, material and chemical suppliers, and metrology and inspection tool fabricators to develop extreme ultraviolet lithography technologies on 300- and 450-micrometer wafers.

A partnership of such would bring all the stakeholders and financial resources to one location and would be vital to our Nation if we're going to compete in the global race for the next generation of semiconductors.

I ask my colleagues to support this very key amendment.