Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on H.R. 359.

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

Mr. Chairman, last night, the President in this very Chamber issued us an invitation. In that invitation, there were several opportunities, but two of them I would like to highlight. One is, he said this: He said he is willing to eliminate whatever we can honestly afford to do without. I take the President at face value that he's interested in doing that.

The thing that the President issued was an invitation where he said this: He said, in fact, the best thing we could do on taxes for all Americans is to simplify the Tax Code.

Well, the law of governing Presidential election campaign funds in the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account is located in the Internal Revenue Code, which really inherently makes no sense.

And I think during the course of this debate, Mr. Chairman, we're going to lay out the argument as to why the President's first point can be greeted and agreed to, that first goal that this is simply something that we can do without.

Let me make a couple of quick points. I think it's important to recognize the irony of the Statement of Administration Policy that was published on January 25, and I'm reading in the third paragraph, he says--the administration, in criticism of this effort, says, ``Its effect would be to expand the power of corporations and special interests in the Nation's elections to force many candidates into an endless cycle of fundraising at the expense of engagement with voters on the issues.''

How can that be, Mr. Chairman? President Obama, when he was a candidate in 2000 for the United States Presidency, declined to participate in this fund, both in his primary and in his general election. And if President Obama has been able to rise above that, I think other Americans can rise above that.

Also, I would just like to bring your attention to that same argument, and that is, a ``Dear colleague'' that was sent criticizing this bill said basically the same thing: By creating a viable alternative to private fundraising, the public financing system was designed to level the electoral playing field and ensure that candidates remain accountable to voters, not special interests.

So does that mean, implicitly, Mr. Chairman, that candidates who didn't participate in the program are somehow not accountable to voters? I think President Obama would say he's really accountable to voters.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma, the author of the bill, Mr. Cole.

I yield the gentleman 1 additional minute.

Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Schock).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arkansas (Mr. Womack).

Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, the minority leader was on the floor a couple of minutes ago--and I know the weather is urgent, I didn't want to prolong this drama--but it seemed to me to make the argument that this doesn't do anything as it relates to economic growth is just an incredible overstatement.

One of the things that we continue to hear, and the President's own debt commission spoke eloquently about the nature of debt and the stifling nature of debt on the economy and the stifling nature of spending on the economy. Here the Congressional Budget Office says, without ambiguity, the Congressional Budget Office says H.R. 359 would reduce direct spending by $617 million over the 2011-2021 period.

This is an opportunity for us to take the admonition of the minority leader, to take the admonition of the President, to take the admonition of what the electorate told us in November and that is to concentrate on ways that we can trim this government, the burden on the taxpayer that adds absolutely no value.

There is not one Member on this House floor, Mr. Chairman, that has defended the results of this system. I urge passage of this bill.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the amendment.

I wholeheartedly agree and ask that it be passed.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order against the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I must insist on the point of order. I raise a point of order against the amendment because it violates clause 10 of rule XXI, known as the CutGo rule. The amendment proposed increased mandatory spending without an equal or great reduction in existing mandatory spending relative to the underlying bill in violation of the rule.

I object.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. Speaker, there is really no sense of irony here, is there, that the proponents, the self-described proponents of transparency and openness, in the twinkling of an eye before a vote on an adjournment day come over and say there's your motion to recommit?

This was posted online, Mr. Speaker, on Thursday of last week. The proponents--and this is a modified open rule--the proponents had an opportunity, Mr. Speaker, on Friday to file an amendment, on Monday to file an amendment, on Tuesday to file an amendment. But the very described people who are now cloaking themselves in a mantle of openness and transparency say, ``There you go''--moments ago. Okay, that's the program. I get the program.

What is this ultimately all about? There is a sincere effort on the part of this majority, and I think some folks on the minority as well, to take the President up. There is a real attempt on the part of the proponents of this bill, Mr. Cole of Oklahoma, to try and save money, to look out over the entire course of this budget and all of these challenges. And Mr. Cole and the folks that are behind H.R. 359, the underlying bill, are ultimately saying we can save $617 million over a 10-year period. Mr. Speaker, that's according to the CBO.

So it comes down to a very simple thing. If you want to save the money, you defeat the amendment. If you want to play games on the day that we're all heading out, trying to act like you are full of transparency and openness, support the amendment.

I urge a ``no'' vote.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Parliamentary Inquiry

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

You know, the past year we have had an incredible national conversation about this issue, health care, and it has been robust and dynamic, and it has brought about a sense of clarity. You know, oftentimes we tell people, look, if you want to participate, participate in the ballot box. Make your voice heard. And I really don't think there's any arguing that last November people made their voices heard, and they said with real clarity that they want this bill repealed and they want it replaced with something that brings health care costs down and deals with preexisting conditions.

Employers in my home State, Madam Speaker, just got hit hard with the new tax increase that got jammed through by the Illinois General Assembly. Seventy-four percent of employers in the Midwest have recently, in surveys, said that this bill that we're talking about repealing would have an adverse impact on their hiring decisions.

Now, it's with no sense of irony that now-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, when she was Speaker, said that we have to pass the bill so that you can see what's in it. Well, she did, and we do. And the American public does. And the American public said, Enough. They understand that what has to happen is that businesses have to be able to thrive and to hire and to grow and be dynamic.

If we repeal this and replace this with the type of thoughtful health care initiative that is going to be forthcoming, I think we will do a world of service to everybody that we're trying to help, and that is to change this economy so that people want to hire again.

Madam Speaker, I thank the leader for yielding.

You know, one of the untold stories of the House of Representatives is the connections that Members have with one another that really never show up, except among ourselves. I had a unique connection with Gabrielle Giffords, I still do, and that is when we came in in this class of 2006, we were both invited to participate, one on one or two together, in a series of interviews that was hosted by National Public Radio, the show All Things Considered. I had not met Gabrielle before that and we started this dialogue back and forth and really enjoyed that. And I found that she had this very refreshing and winsome approach, as we all know, to how she would handle herself and how she conducts herself.

So it's really no surprise to me that we're hearing hopeful news about her medical condition based on a disposition of perseverance. And I thought that the conversations that I was involved in with her brought a brightness to public life and brought something that as I heard from constituents that would listen to her, they would say to me, I can see how you would like serving with people like that. And that is sort of the lost lead, I think, in some ways about the House of Representatives.

We were heartsick on Saturday when we heard that news. I know many of my constituents who are to their knees in prayer for Gabrielle and for the victims of that shooting. And so as I think we all reflect on the gift that we have been given, we have a great example in Gabrielle Giffords in somebody who understands the nature of democracy and real willingness to serve, and we wish her the very best and pray for her complete recovery.

Mr. Chair, I thank the gentleman for yielding.

The State of Washington is cutting the working health care for the working poor? That's what we heard a minute ago. But wasn't it just an argument just a couple of months ago, Mr. Chair, that if this body took up the ObamaCare that basically the birds were going to be chirping and the sun was going to come out and the clouds were going to part and the economy was going to be fabulous and we were not going to have another health care problem again? But what happened? Running ramrod through this body ended up a job-killing health care bill, and now we're wringing our hands. It's amazing to me.

Back when I was in the Illinois General Assembly, Mr. Chair, I used to practice law, and there was one time when I filed a motion at a courthouse and I approached a judge, and he knew that I was a legislator. And with a twinkle in his eye, he said, Well, Mr. Roskam, let's see how you voted on the judicial pay raise, and he kind of

looked underneath his blotter. He was teasing me, and I quickly said, Well, Your Honor, I voted ``no'' but I hoped ``yes.'' He thought about that for a second and he said, Motion granted.

Now, I hope today there's a whole lot of show business going on here, because I hope today, Mr. Chair, what's happening is that there's a lot of people who say they're voting ``no'' that aren't really voting ``no.'' I mean, with due respect to my friend and colleague from the State of Illinois who acknowledged that there's insufficient funds, he thinks there's going to be insufficient funds, Mr. Chair, in the 112th Congress? Hey, look around, 111th Congress, there isn't sufficient funds.

This Congress and this leadership, Mr. Chair, has doubled our national debt in 5 years and, based on their own numbers, will triple that national debt in 10 years. So this is not a news flash that's coming in the 112th Congress. It's here today.

We had Debt Dependence Day here in the United States on August 4 of this year, which was the date at which every dime that went out from the Federal Government, Mr. Chair, was borrowed money. So let's not act as if this is a new issue. This is not a new issue.

Here's the issue that's before us: We're looking at a cataclysmic tax increase that has the potential to drive us and to push us to a tipping point and a spiral that goes further and further down.

Now, let me talk to friends on my side of the aisle who think a better deal is coming. Friends on my side of the aisle say, Oh, we're going to get a better deal. On January 5, we'll pass a bill. On January 6, somehow, miraculously, the Senate is going to pass it. On January 7, the President is going to remove all his objections. Even assuming, Mr. Chair, that that's true, let's think that through for a second.

Okay. So January 7, a new fabulous bill is signed into law. It's not until mid-February until the Internal Revenue Service can deal with that. It's not until mid-March when corporations and payers can deal with it. And so, again, at the best case scenario, you're looking at sucking the life out of this economy for 90 days. And what does that do to all of our constituents? That puts us in a downward trajectory that none of us want. Nobody wants that.

You know, I think one of the messages of November 2 is that we need to come together and work together. Yeah, there's things in this bill I don't like. There's things in this bill that I'm not pleased with, but I do know that at all costs we need to avoid a job-killing tax increase.

I would be happy to yield to the gentleman from Illinois.

Reclaiming my time, clearly it's not deficit neutral. Clearly, it does add to the deficit, which is why I said that it's not completely satisfactory. So Mr. Ryan, as ranking member and incoming chairman of the Budget Committee, has indicated what his intentions are.

But, you know, I do find it ironic that there is this newfound robust interest on the other side of the aisle as it relates to deficit reduction, notwithstanding the CBO's, OMB's, and everybody else's numbers that the national debt will triple in 10 years based on the current majority.

So I've said my piece, but I think it's very clear that what we need to avoid, Mr. Chair, at all costs, is raising taxes and putting this economy into a spiral out of which real, real difficulties come.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

A couple of months ago I'm walking through a manufacturing facility in the western suburbs of Chicago with the entrepreneur that started it. This is a guy who about 45 years ago is living on the northwest side of Chicago with his wife. He's a tinkerer, the type of person that goes in the garage and comes up with some idea, kind of a blue-collar guy, a tool and die guy. He comes up with an idea. Over a period of time he borrows a couple of thousand bucks from his mother-in-law and he builds up a little business.

This is a very typical story. This isn't unique to Chicago or Detroit or New York. This happens all the time. He then builds that business up, and I'm sitting down with him and his son who's now running it. The old man is now 70 years old. I'm walking the plant floor with him and I ask him: How's business? And he tells me about the travails since September of '08, which we're all familiar with, but it's now a lean operation.

He further says, ``Congressman, the smart move for me is to put three-quarters of a million bucks into this production line.'' And he points to a production line on the floor.

I ask him, ``Are you going to do the smart thing?''

And he says, ``No, I'm not.''

And of course I ask him why not.

He says, ``Because Washington, D.C. tells me I'm rich. See, I'm a sub S and I file as an individual and Washington D.C. tells me I'm rich. So that means I've got to hold on to capital because I don't know what's going on. I think my taxes might be going up at the first of the year.'' And then further he mentioned health care, he mentioned cap and trade, he mentioned ambiguity in the capital market.

But for the life of me I don't understand why we as a body have not figured out that we need people like him--my constituent, the entrepreneur--to go out and hire folks. And he's not going to do it if his taxes are going to go up.

And this is not a uniquely Republican revelation, Mr. Speaker. Peter Orszag recently said that now is no time to raise taxes on anybody. Dr. Christina Roemer also argued, now is not the time to raise taxes on anybody. And for a majority with all due respect, Mr. Speaker, that has had the calendar now well in place and been able to control this process for years and now we find ourselves 30 days out from the largest tax increase in American history and we're having this junior varsity argument about whether we should nickel and dime the very people that we're trying to create an incentive for, I just think that we can do better. I think the American public, Mr. Speaker, has an expectation that we're going to do better. I think frankly the White House has an expectation that we can do better. So I urge us to defeat this today and to really get about this very serious idea of how it is that we create not just certainty and predictability but an environment where the entrepreneurs that I described and I represent--and we all represent--say to themselves, yes, I want to invest and I want to hire more.

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate a special constituent from my congressional district, Mary Alice D'Arcy, on her upcoming retirement. For the past thirty years, she has had a remarkable impact on Easter Seals DuPage and the Fox Valley Region.

Since 1981, Mary Alice has served as President and CEO of Easter Seals, one of the largest out-patient pediatric rehabilitation centers in Illinois. Under her leadership, Easter Seals was awarded the highest possible accreditation for outpatient rehabilitation from the Commission for Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities in 2007 and 2010.

Mary Alice has been an important advocate of the organization's mission to enable infants, children and adults with disabilities to achieve independence. She has dedicated her life to helping these individuals in overcoming obstacles, and has been a great friend and mentor to families across the State of Illinois.

Madam Speaker and Distinguished Colleagues, please join me in recognizing her extraordinary service and wishing her every happiness in the well deserved respite of her retirement.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise today to recognize the 10th anniversary of the BAPS Shri Swaminarayan Mandir Complex in Bartlett, Illinois. For the past decade, this Hindu Complex has been an asset to the community and emblematic of outstanding service.

The temple was completed in only 16 months with the help of over 1,700 volunteers. This vibrant sense of volunteerism has remained strong through the various charitable projects the Mandir has sponsored within the Sixth District of Illinois. The complex is a center of constant activity, promoting a spirit of service through its weekly classes and seminars designed to inspire, energize, promote, develop and sustain the roots of Indian culture. Its members are frequently involved with projects to better education, improve the environment, and provide relief in times of disasters.

In May of 2005, the BAPS Mandir of Chicago was presented with the ``Best Building Suburb'' award by the Chicago Building Congress (CBC). The Mandir is a fusion of traditional Indian architecture and modern technology, representing a culture that dates back over 8,500 years. Worldwide, the BAPS organization has more than 3,300 centers and maintains a strong volunteer base of 55,000. The organization has received numerous national and international awards for their dedication to humanitarian assistance.

I ask that my Distinguished Colleagues please join me in honoring the BAPS Mandir of Chicago for the valuable contributions it continues to offer the local community.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor a young leader from my Congressional District, Kathleen Walsh. Kathleen's essay was selected as the winner in the City of Elmhurst's ``Mayor for a Day'' competition. The competition focused on citizenship, encouraging applicants to propose new ideas to improve their local community.

The text of Kathleen's essay reads as follows: ``If I were mayor of Elmhurst, I would encourage all residents young and old to be good citizens by creating a volunteering program called `Good Citizens.' To help the elderly and less fortunate do things such as shovel the driveway, help paint, move heavy things, run errands and cook. If you earn a certain amount of `Good Citizens points,' you can earn `volunteering city dollars' (which are donated by local businesses). You get an official nametag, and when you're running an errand you can stop by some local restaurant and get a drink.''

Kathleen's dedication to those in need exemplifies her sense of civic responsibility. Though Kathleen is a young constituent, she understands her duty to the community to be a good neighbor, and recognizes the positive impact of volunteer programs. Kathleen is a reminder of the power of our nation's youth. She is a role model for other young leaders who wish to contribute, and her words serve as a reminder to all young people to be aware of those who are less fortunate in their own communities.

Madam Speaker and Distinguished Colleagues, Kathleen Walsh is a promising young leader who has demonstrated a future in public service. Please join me in recognizing her altruistic spirit and wishing her happiness in her future endeavors.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Gold Star Mothers day, which was observed on the last Sunday of September. This day commemorated the supreme sacrifice made by those who have lost a son or daughter serving in the Armed Forces. By honoring these mothers, we also remember all those who have given their lives in service for our country.

The American Gold Star Mothers assist veterans of the Armed Forces and their dependents in the presentation of claims to the Department of Veterans Affairs, and aid members of the Armed Forces who served and died, or were wounded or incapacitated during hostilities. Their services have strengthened and inspired Americans throughout the history of the United States.

The sacrifice of Gold Star Mothers emphasizes the role of the home and the family as the true foundation of the United States. The American mother is a source of moral and spiritual guidance for the people of the United States; she acts as a positive force to promote good government and peace among all mankind.

For more than eighty years, American Gold Star Mothers have banded together to show their pride and love of our country. These women have given their time and effort to honor all fallen children and assist veterans. In spite of their grief, they have demonstrated an ardent support for and deep service of our country.

Madam Speaker and Distinguished Colleagues, please join me in recognizing the heroic precedent set by Gold Star Mothers and their legacy of patriotism, sacrifice, and service.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize September 15th 2010, as Literacy Awareness Day in Wheaton, Illinois, in the heart of my Congressional District.

Literacy Awareness Day is an initiative of the non-profit group Literacy DuPage. Literacy DuPage reaches over 30 communities in DuPage County. The group's mission is to change the lives of future generations by providing one-on-one English literacy tutoring for adults. To celebrate Literacy Awareness Day on September 15th, participating Wheaton businesses will donate a portion of their sales to help fund the group's literacy programs.

Today, we join together to celebrate Literacy Awareness Day and the growth and continued good works of Literacy DuPage.

Madam Speaker and Distinguished Colleagues, please join me in recognizing September 15th as Literacy Awareness Day in Wheaton, Illinois, and in wishing Literacy DuPage continued success.

Madam Speaker, we have occasion today to mark the deep and sustained friendship between our Nation and the great Republic of Korea.

Today, September 15th, marks the 60th anniversary of the daring amphibious landing at Incheon by United Nations forces under the leadership of General Douglas MacArthur. British military historian Anthony Farrar-Hockley called the landing ``a stroke of genius'' because of the way it caught the North Korean enemy by surprise and put them off-balance.

As the son of a Korean War veteran, I value the history and deep sacrifices the people of both our countries have shared over the years. My father took great pride in service, appreciating the important work of the Korean War for the preservation of liberty and for the advancement of peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula, in Northeast Asia and the world as a whole.

Indeed, the strategic importance of the Republic of Korea as an ally of ours in that region cannot be overstated.

Our friendship with and commitment to Korea does not only rest on the experiences shared in the Korean War six decades ago. No, the United States and the Republic of

Korea remain partners dedicated to peace, freedom, democracy, and global stability.

The relationship between the United States and Korea is a comprehensive and dynamic one. We are major trading partners, with investment ties deep among our countries.

However, we have not even come close to realizing the full potential of this relationship. In 2007 our two countries signed a Free Trade Agreement that, by every estimate, will improve the lives of people in both Korea and the United States by creating jobs, reducing prices of products and services, and expanding consumer choices. This agreement when implemented will remove 95 percent of the bilateral tariffs between our countries that are currently holding back what could be tremendous growth for both sides.

Unfortunately, the agreement has not yet been brought to Congress for a vote. I hope that, in the coming months, my colleagues will recognize the economic boost that ratifying this agreement will generate.

As a co-chair of the bipartisan U.S.-Korea Free Trade Working Group, I will be working to ensure that we can meet President Obama's stated goal of being able to resolve outstanding issues by November so that we can once and for all remove this impediment to an increasingly productive economic relationship.

I look forward to a vigorous discussion of the merits of the agreement as ratification would further consolidate the longstanding friendship between the United States and Korea, an alliance forged in battle and sharpened through six decades of business, cultural, and political exchanges.

Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join me in remembering the success of the Incheon Landing on its 60th anniversary, saluting the veterans of the Korean War, and recognizing the bright future ahead for our two countries when we can finally realize the mutual benefits of the U.S.-Korea Free Trade Agreement.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate David Williams on his retirement as the Itasca Village Administrator. Over the past 10 years, Mr. Williams has generously served the Village of Itasca.

Prior to becoming Village Administrator, Mr. Williams worked for the Illinois State Police for thirty years. Under his skilled direction and leadership, Itasca has undergone a great transformation. The Village of Itasca has witnessed the design and completion of a new village hall, police department, and construction has recently begun on the Itasca Riverwalk. Mr. Williams also serves on the board of directors and several committees for the DuPage Mayors and Mangers Conference. His coordination and guidance for the community was one of the reasons Itasca was named one of the ``150 Great Places in Illinois'' by the American Institute of Architects.

Madam Speaker and Distinguished Colleagues, please join me in honoring Mr. Williams for his remarkable career and wishing him the best of luck in all of his future endeavors.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and congratulate CleNET International, LLC for being selected by the U.S. Department of Commerce's Minority Business Development Agency to receive the Minority Global Technology Firm of the Year Award.

Headquartered in Oakbrook, Illinois, CleNET Technologies is one of the top technical service providers in the area of globally sourced consulting, software development, testing and system integration. They have become a leading global delivery partner with clients from all over the world.

This particular award was created to recognize minority entrepreneurs who have exemplified leadership in their industry, success as a business and who have had a positive impact on their communities.

CleNET has played an integral role in creating jobs and sustaining the local economy. I would like to recognize the admirable work of owners Jeff Fang and Michael Yuan who have built this business to be as successful as it is today, employing over 1,100 people worldwide.

Madam Speaker and Distinguished Colleagues, please join me on this special occasion in paying tribute to CleNET International, LLC for their superior achievements.