Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the important role that Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSIs) play in educating our nation's students. And I congratulate those institutions for their efforts as HSIs across the country celebrate National HSIs Week next week, September 19-25, 2011.

Hispanic Serving Institutions play an important role in educating many underprivileged students and helping them attain their full potential through higher education. National Hispanic-Serving Institutions Week recognizes the contributions of these exemplary institutions at the forefront of service to our nation's youngest and largest ethnic population. It is significant that we pay tribute to them for their commitment to secure academic access, equity, excellence and success for every American.

Hispanic-Serving Institutions provide hope and opportunity to America's diverse communities of learners, reflecting the belief that every American should have access to a college education. While HSIs constitute less than 5 percent of America's institutions of higher education, they enroll 50 percent of all Hispanic Americans enrolled in colleges and universities.

This year also marks the 25th Anniversary or Silver Anniversary of the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities (HACU), an association working to improve the capacity of HSIs to help students succeed across our nation.

In honoring the many contributions of Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs), we recognize the critical role that HSIs play in providing quality educational opportunities to Hispanics and to all other students who attend these institutions.

Congratulations to HACU and to the nations' Hispanic Serving Institutions, and thank you for your service to our communities and your contributions to higher education.

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

H.R. 2584 is, without question and without precedent, the most regressive, destructive, and shameless attack on our environmental protections, this country's public health, and conservation in over four decades.

This is accomplished through the backdoor changes, 40 idealogically driven policy riders in the legislation, and it's easily the biggest payout to polluters and special interests who helped craft these riders and who are now adding those to our laws. And it's also accomplished on the riders, riders on an appropriations bill that legislates.

It's also accomplished through defunding agencies, such as the EPA, so that their oversight is weakened and their enforcement becomes nonexistent.

Giveaway public lands. These mechanisms are used in this legislation to not only undermine but to dismantle protections that have been part of the legacy of this Nation for years upon years and decade upon decade. Matters of life and death to the American people, clean air and clean water, are left without funding to protect American families.

And the legislation before us does not create jobs. If the reason of the deficit--the reason that this is being done, as we hear from the other side, is for deficit reduction, that sounds hollow and contrived when one measures the cost of public health and cleanup that awaits the taxpayer in the very near future. It sounds hollow when the taxpayer sees the tax breaks, the public resource giveaways, and unregulated privileges to industry and big business. It seems hollow when the average American taxpayer suffers both the financial and human costs of this legislation.

Let me use one example of a rider introduced by my colleague from Arizona, a son of Arizona, to the Grand Canyon. This would effectively defund any opportunity to study, to analyze the consequences of uranium mining on 1 million acres around the Grand Canyon.

If anything else were to be an important point for this Congress, it is the icon of all our national parks, the Grand Canyon. And the uranium mining in that area has caused damage to people and the environment for years upon years. And now with this rider, we are perpetuating the same climate, the same strategy that has caused the problems in the area. We are jeopardizing the water, the Colorado River, and water users in Nevada, California, and Arizona. And they use an expert; they tout an expert, as of today and recently, a person who rationalized that there will be no real damage to the Grand Canyon. Isn't it ironic and somewhat interesting to note that this expert is sitting on 30 or more mining claims in the withdrawal area around the Grand Canyon and would stand to do very, very well financially upon the sale and resale of these claims? This is the expert.

This legislation, H.R. 2584, is a feeding frenzy for polluters, Big Oil, and speculators who make their huge profits by cutting corners, ignoring regulations, and skirting the responsibilities that we all have to follow the law. Now

their mission has an eager partner--the majority of the House of Representatives. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this legislation and to protect the health of the American people and the health of our legacy as a Nation.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Madam Speaker, I am here to join with my colleagues in thanking the gentlelady from California (Ms. Woolsey) for all that she has done to provide leadership on an issue that has been critical to the American people on an issue that she could very justifiably say, ``I told you so.''

Since I've been in this House, it's been my distinct privilege to consider her a friend and to enjoy the leadership and the insight that she has provided to many of us. Her position on Afghanistan is correct and a necessary position as we see these times before us. Americans who feel the sting of doing more with less are connecting the dots between Federal spending priorities and the pain that they're feeling at home right now.

Americans struggling to put their kids through college without any Pell Grants or running out of unemployment benefits with no new job on the horizon cannot ignore the cost of this war. The war has cost taxpayers in my congressional district more than $580 million so far. That's about 11,000 elementary school teachers that could be hired for a year or 84,000 students that could go to community college or a university or a trade school or a career school.

These are just some of the bad trade-offs we are making by spending our national resources on a war instead of fixing the problems that we have here at home. Ask yourself, which would you rather have, a war that is not making us safer and not worth the cost, or a more educated, prosperous America?

We cannot afford the nearly $10 billion per month while families struggle to stay afloat and the slow recovery of our Nation continues. Keeping America safe does not require 100,000 troops in Afghanistan. Al Qaeda is no longer in Afghanistan but scattered across the world. It did not take 100,000 troops to find Osama bin Laden, and it does not take a military occupation of Afghanistan to protect us from terrorist threats.

I am deeply proud of the hard work and incredible sacrifice of our brave men and women in uniform. We know they are carrying out the mission in Afghanistan with dedication and extraordinary competence. Through this nearly 10-year military campaign, they have done all that we have asked of them and represented our Nation's very best values and ideals. Now it's time to bring our troops home, and bring them home to a new reality. Since the year 2000, we have lost 2 million jobs in this country while we have added 30 million people to our population. After 10 years of a failed fiscal policy that brags about job creators through tax cuts, incentives and subsidies to corporations, this failed policy continues to be promoted as a solution to our economy and to the recession that we find ourselves in.

We need to bring our troops home. We need to integrate them fully back into our society and into our country. One of the best ways to do that is to provide jobs and opportunity. And one way is for the government to create jobs in public service and public works. By putting America back to work, we are beginning to crawl out of the hole that we have been in for the last 10 years.

Afghanistan is a stark example of flawed priorities. As we go forward with the discussion of the debt ceiling, with how to balance this budget and how to articulate priorities that the American people want, let us not forget that one of the priorities the American people have insisted on time and time again is to end these two misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan, bring those troops home, redirect those resources to the needs that the American people face right now, and in this way, begin not only to make our economy better, but return some moral imperative to this Nation.

Mr. Speaker, Theola Marie Starks was born on June 2nd, 1928 in Grant, Oklahoma, the fourth of ten children of Reverend John B. and Marie C. Dawson. She and her husband, Burnes O. (Chief) Starks, Sr., moved to Phoenix in 1949 and started a family with the first of their ten children, Burnes O. (Burney) Starks, Jr. Mr. Starks was a chemist and soil tester for Arizona Testing Laboratories, and both Mr. and Mrs. Starks supplemented their income by picking cotton across the state.

The family moved to Tucson in 1966 and continued to raise their ten children on the south side of town in the Western Hills and Las Vistas neighborhoods. Mrs. Starks was very involved in community service, working as a teacher's aide and volunteering at a number of schools including Utterback, Cavett and Townsend. She always made friends easily and turned them into family. She believed in the Village raising children--she felt strongly that ``your kids are mine and mine are yours.''

Mrs. Starks also frequently volunteered with respected neighborhood matriarch Mrs. Tommie Thomas. Even though she only had a tenth grade education, she made sure her children understood the value and importance of education, integrity and hard work. All ten children-- Burnes O., Gary E., Daryl D., Terry L., Charles G., Donna R., Harry J., Jacqueline B., Larry D., and Timothy B.--finished high school and entered college. Seven of the ten children earned college degrees.

Dr. Kevin Leman, noted psychologist and birth order doctor, has often commented on this woman and the remarkable way she raised ten children. Beyond her immediate family, nearly 100 children knew her as ``mom'' or ``grandma.''

Theola Starks' life was defined by miracles, as those who know her can testify, but the greatest miracle was her--the ability to smile, touch, befriend, forgive, mother and love anyone who came into her life. She was the ultimate prayer warrior. Today, we mark her passing and commend her as a role model and a wonderful person.

Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 413, I was unavoidably detained and was unable to cast my vote. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yes.''

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the wild horse stallion known as Cloud, born May 29, 1995 in the Pryor Mountain Wild Horse Range of Montana.

This majestic stallion has become the most famous wild horse in the world, and serves as the ambassador and emblem of wild horses and burros living free and protected on public lands.

No other wild horse in United States history has had his life story known and shared throughout the world.

Filmed as a tottering newborn foal beside his mother, the citizens of our great nation watched him grow into a bachelor stallion living among other young males, testing his strength, honing the skills he would one day need to start his own family.

Eventually, Cloud became a band stallion, winning mares and fathering his own foals. Cloud's history, captured on film and books by Ginger Kathrens, filmmaker and documentarian, has been shown throughout the United States on Public Broadcasting as part of the Nature Series, and throughout the world on numerous channels and networks.

Cloud symbolizes the spirit of the West and links us with our heritage. The study of his life

has brought recognition and appreciation of wild horses and burros on our public lands. Cloud has taught us that what wild horses and burros cherish most is not so different than for all Americans, freedom and family.

Mr. Speaker, I rise to honor U.S. Border Patrol Agents Hector R. Clark and Eduardo Rojas, Jr.

Hector R. Clark and Eduardo Rojas, Jr., agents of the U.S. Border Patrol, sadly lost their lives on Thursday, May 12, 2011 in Gila Bend,

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize former United States Army Combat Medic and current University of Arizona student Matt Randle.

Over the course of his career in the Army, Matt received two Army Commendation Medals, three Army Achievement Medals and two Good Conduct Medals for his service.

Following his distinguished service to our country Matt returned to his hometown of Tucson, Arizona and enrolled at the University of Arizona. Once on the UA campus, Matt began working with UA President Robert Shelton and his staff to develop and implement a program to support returning veterans attending the University. I am proud to say that today the University of Arizona, located in my Congressional district, has one of the most progressive and impressive veteran education and service models in the country including a student run veteran's office.

Matt's leadership has also played an integral role in the prosperity of the UA Veterans club. This club received numerous awards on the University of Arizona's campus including the Club of the Year and Philanthropic Group of the Year for the 2009-2010 academic school year. The Student Veterans of America also recognized the club nationally, awarding it the ``Club of the Year Award.''

This year Matt will receive the UA's 2011 Robie Award. The award is issued to students who show personal integrity, initiative, cooperativeness, enthusiasm, humility, patriotism, well-rounded interests, active participation in student affairs and a commitment to service. Matt Randle is a model candidate for this award.

Matt Randle's ambition and leadership both at the UA and nationally will certainly be of great benefit to our returning veterans. Every day more veterans return home from the Middle East conflicts. The programs that Matt built on the University of Arizona campus support these men and women as they transition back to civilian life.

Upon graduation Matt will be attending the University Of Arizona Rogers College of Law in the fall of 2011.

I am pleased to acknowledge my constituent and friend, Matt Randle. I thank him for his leadership, service and outstanding contributions to the University and our community.

Mr. Speaker, I am honored to recognize former United States Army Combat Medic and current University of Arizona student Matt Randle.

Over the course of his career in the Army, Matt received two Army Commendation Medals, three Army Achievement Medals and two Good Conduct Medals for his service.

Following his distinguished service to our country Matt returned to his hometown of Tucson, Arizona and enrolled at the University of Arizona. Once on the UA campus, Matt began working with UA President Robert Shelton and his staff to develop and implement an initiative for returning veterans. I am proud to say that today the University of Arizona, located in my congressional district, has one of the most progressive and impressive veteran education and service models in the country including a student run veteran's office.

Matt's leadership has also played an integral role in the prosperity of the UA Veterans club. This club has received numerous awards including the ``club'' and ``Philanthropic Group'' of the year awards for the 2009-2010 academic school year on the UA campus and the Student Veterans of America ``club of the year award.''

Additionally, Matt will receive the UA's 2011 Robie Award which is issued to students who show personal integrity, initiative, cooperativeness, enthusiasm, humility, well-rounded interests, active participation in student affairs, service to the university and willingness to give more than required, and show a love of God and country. Thankfully, upon graduation Matt will not be leaving Tucson; he will be attending the University of Arizona Rogers College Of Law in the fall of 2011.

Each day more veterans return home from the Middle East conflicts. Matt Randle's ambition and leadership both at the UA and nationally will certainly be of great benefit to our returning veterans.

I am pleased to acknowledge and thank my constituent and friend, Matt Randle of the University of Arizona for his leadership, service and outstanding contributions to our community.

Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment in the nature of a substitute at the desk.

Mr. Chairman, the amendment, the budget substitute that we have before you, the people's budget, is an honest document consistent with our country's values and our country's desires.

The people's budget does not tell the American people what they want to hear; it gives the American people what they want: Fairness, protection of our social net for Americans in retirement and at the beginning of their lives, jobs, an immediate infusion of job creation to put people back to work, investments in education. And this budget is balanced by 2021, the deficit is eliminated. It is the only budget that accomplishes that that is before you today.

It does not balance the budget on the backs of the middle class, those who aspire to be in the middle class, and those that are vulnerable in our society.

It reverses a practice and it taxes those corporations and the very, very 2 percent rich in this country so they pay their just sacrifice to keeping this country healthy and turning our country around.

We end the wars that are draining our national Treasury and our people. The Progressive Caucus listened to the American people, and the people's budget is what they want.

I urge approval of this budget. It is a document that represents the very best of what the people need, and it represents a departure from a practice that has brought us to the brink of a deep recession, to a practice that has brought us to joblessness across this country and to a practice that has given the privileged all they want and transferred that responsibility to working Americans in this country.

Our budget is a document that is honest, it is straightforward and merits your support.

I reserve the balance of my time.

I encourage the gentlemen at their next opportunity, the gentlemen across the aisle, to explain to the American taxpayer why they have to pay thousands of dollars on Tax Day when GE didn't have to pay a single cent and, in fact, got money back on Tax Day. Our budget is about shared sacrifice.

I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey).

I yield 15 seconds to the distinguished cochair of the Progressive Caucus, the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from California, Ms. Barbara Lee.

I again yield 15 seconds to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

I yield an additional 15 seconds to the gentleman from Minnesota.

Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for withdrawing the word ``socialist'' from his commentary.

I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Waters).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Lewis).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Ellison).

I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Hawaii (Ms. Hirono).

Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from California (Ms. Chu).

I yield myself 10 seconds.

If I may, I have a simple inquiry for the gentleman from Wisconsin.

As part of the fairness in our Tax Code, I would like to ask, is it fair that, let's say, Warren Buffett should pay a lower income tax rate than his receptionist? Is that fairness in our Tax Code?

I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New York, Congressman Rangel.

Mr. Chairman, I yield for the purpose of making a unanimous consent request to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah).

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

I yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).

Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Laurie Ann Melrood. For more than 40 years, Laurie Melrood has dedicated her life to social justice, speaking as a voice for people with no voice in the United States and other countries. Her initiative and persistence have changed the lives of countless individuals and communities.

The oldest of three children of Paul Melrood and Gitel Kastrul, Laurie Melrood is a second generation American. Her Jewish relatives survived pogroms in the Ukraine from which her father fled as an infant. Her life has been characterized by service since her earliest days.

As a young person in the 1960's, she advocated with African American and Jewish youth for desegregation of Milwaukee Public Schools.

She lived, worked, and studied in Israel during the late 1960's.

She was a member of the International Association of Yiddish Clubs.

In 1971, for her undergraduate internship at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, she started Pathfinders, a shelter for runaway teens.

In 1972-1973, Laurie served as a community mental health worker in the ``Back of the Yards'' neighborhood in South Chicago.

In 1975, she graduated with a Master's Degree in Community Social Work from the University of Wisconsin, Madison. For her graduate internship she started a community service project for high school seniors who received credit for their service.

In 1974-1982, Laurie served as the Program Director of Jewish Social Services in Madison, Wisconsin. She established the culturally-based and ground breaking model L'Chaim Program for seniors at Madison Jewish Social Services, breaking the social isolation of Jewish and non-Jewish seniors.

From 1981-1982, Laurie was the Director for Community Action on Latin America in Madison, WI.

From 1982-1986, she was a principle organizer in South Texas and Wisconsin for the Underground Railroad and Public Sanctuary of the National Sanctuary Movement helping refugees from Central America to find shelter in the United States. She also assisted numerous refugees immigrate from Russia and Iran to the United States through HIAS, a Jewish Refugee Aid Agency.

From 1986-1990, Ms. Melrood assisted Central American refugee minor children who were detained in Texas by placing them with sponsoring families.

In 1992, Laurie became a staff member for the Pima County Juvenile Court's Court Appointed Special Advocate Program, she recruited volunteers to accompany and advocate for youth in the juvenile justice system. At Pima County Juvenile Court she also served as the Adoptions Examiner, specializing in foreign adoptions.

In 1994, she was one of three co-founders of a health training project in northern Guatemala, specializing in acupuncture and medical aid. The program is unique in training rural health promoters in acupuncture for curative medicine.

In 2000, Laurie was a principle program organizer and collaborator; starting the Kinship and Adoptions Resource Center KA.R.E. Family Center (KARE) in Tucson, Arizona in 2002. KARE is a full service family program helping grandparents and relatives who are raising grandchildren. This center has become a model of social services of its kind for the nation. Laurie has presented this model at child welfare conferences, written about the unmet need of this growing national population of Americans, and strongly advocated for their empowerment.

Mr. Speaker, Laurie Ann Melrood is a true leader of social justice. Her lifetime work of social service and advocacy in the United States and Latin America profoundly affected the lives of innumerable individuals. I want to thank her for her service to this country and to the international community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate the Nogales Apaches on winning the Arizona State High School Division 4A-1 basketball championship.

The Apaches' victory over Scottsdale Saguaro to win the title on Saturday came after their upset victory of the top-ranked Glendale Kellis team on Thursday. This win marked the first time in 28 years that a Nogales school has reached a championship game in any sport. So this is a particularly gratifying victory.

Coach Ricardo De La Riva deserves a great deal of credit for leading his team through the season, through the upset victories, and through the long process of building a successful and cohesive team.

This is a group that truly plays with heart. It represents the best of the community, as shown by the seven busloads of fans who traveled for several hours from Nogales to Glendale for the championship game.

As Coach De La Riva told the Arizona Daily Star after the game: ``This is a true team. We don't have stars. We don't have egos. We just play.'' His team reminds us of what scholastic sport is all about.

I join with everyone else in congratulating the school, the team, and the community of Nogales in Santa Cruz. Congratulations.

Mr. Chair, a strong definition for gainful employment is vital to protect vulnerable borrowers from unmanageable debts incurred from heavily overpriced programs. The failure of the regulatory agency to define gainful employment up to this point has left open an avenue by which bad actors have taken advantage of the lack of regulation and created a number of overpriced programs of dubious academic quality targeted at underserved communities, people of color, and low-income students who have not been adequately prepared for a form of employment that will make it possible for those students to pay their loans back.

This amendment stops this process in its tracks. A student who borrows large amounts of money to pay for a higher education should have a reasonable expectation that the degree or certificate she is working for will qualify her for employment at a job that will allow her to repay those loans at a manageable rate.

The vast majority of programs around the country subject to this definition, whether public or private, for-profit or not-for-profit, are doing a good job of providing quality education and training at a reasonable price. Those schools and programs that are doing an effective job have every reason to distance themselves from the ones taking advantage of a lack of oversight, who make the entire industry look bad.

This definition will not impede access to federal aid for any of these programs. In fact, if the rule were to be implemented in its current form, it would affect very few programs and many bad actors who are not concerned about the debts their students will be saddled with will continue to qualify.

It's incredible to me that this amendment is being sold as a move to protect minority students. I, myself, cannot fathom how low-income people of color are protected by being tied to unmanageable and unforgiveable debts from federal loans that don't require a shred of evidence that the program will lead to any form of gainful employment for the borrower.

Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

My strong opposition to this amendment is because it would bar the Department of Justice or any other Federal agency from challenging the constitutionality of this law in Arizona or any other law.

The precedent being set by the Poe amendment, if it were to be adopted, would establish a dangerous new standard. It opens the door to congressional restraints on active pending Department of Justice litigation in a potentially endless variety of cases through backdoor de-funding moves.

The precedent is being set here, and I appreciate the gentleman's point about Arizona working its will; but there are also people that believe in the Constitution, as we all do, who would want to know that the law in Arizona passes constitutional muster. This is what this lawsuit is about. This is why we have separation of powers. This is why we have a Constitution, to protect the interests of all people.

SB 1070, you can support it; I can oppose it. The point being that there is a third part of our government that will decide whether or not this law is constitutional. I believe all of us would like to uphold constitutional laws.

I yield back the balance of my time.

Point of Order

Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

The legislation before us, the continuing resolution, I believe is a full-throttled extremist assault on the environment, on the public health of the American people, and on the jobs and economic well-being of our Nation as a whole. In these difficult times that we are in, it is the economy and jobs that should be the top priorities for this Congress and for the Republican majority.

Mr. Chairman, this CR does irreparable harm to the environment, including to the air, water, our public lands, and to wildlife. The virtual elimination of public health protection by the reckless dismantling of the jurisdiction of the EPA and of the funding of the EPA will bring health crises to the American people and will endanger families and children.

Today, the President is announcing his great outdoors initiative, and at a time when he is asking for private, State, local, and Federal cooperation in the protection of public places in the enhancement of recreation and outdoor activities for the American people, this CR talks about the elimination of State and tribal wildlife grants which are essential in that coordination. It talks about reducing by 90 percent the land water conservation fund, which is essential to promoting that cooperation and promoting the joint planning and joint jurisdiction of many of our special places in this country.

And the upcoming punitive attempt to eliminate the national landscape conservation system will leave 800 public units abandoned without coordination and without the ability to plan for the future and to be coordinated in such a fashion that they save money and serve the American people the best.

This CR places our special public places and lands on the endangered list, with irrational cuts in ending the shared responsibility to protect and conserve. Big Oil and gas and mining do not own these public places and lands--the American people do--and to turn to extraction as the only goal for these public lands denies history, ignores science, and welcomes the exploitation of a shared resource by the American people.

If deficit reduction is the item on the agenda--and we all agree that we must confront that and be prudent, be pragmatic, and be realistic in cutting programs--then we also should put everything on the table because if it is indeed an issue of deficit reduction, then let's talk about some items that the majority did not put in their CR, some of the subsidies, some of the giveaways to industries that are part of the public land agenda and part of what happens within the Interior Department:

Expensing reforestation expenditures, $600 million under public land; excessive percentage over cost depletion for nonfuel minerals, $500 million; expensing exploration for nonfuel minerals, $400 million; intangible drilling costs, $8.9 billion; oil and gas royalty relief, $6.9 billion; domestic manufacturing and tax deduction for oil and gas companies, $6.2 billion. And if you keep going down that list with coal subsidies, nuclear industry subsidies, oil and gas subsidies, public land subsidies, you end up with a figure of $100 billion to $200 billion.

I'm not saying that all those cuts should be eliminated. I don't think we should take an axe to those areas. Some are productive and needed; but if we are going to scrutinize this budget, let's do it in a fair way that shares and balances what we're going through while we protect important things in our public lands and in our public health.

I urge all my colleagues to balance public health of families and children, the public lands we love, the shared responsibility we have to clean air, water, public health, and our national resources, balance that with the narrow agenda that is confronting us

today, an agenda that punishes taxpayers and the American people at the expense and for the profit of private oil and gas interests in this country.

As we confront this issue, I would suggest to my colleagues that the legacy of our public lands and our environment, the legacy of our clean air and water, the public health of our people should be the priority. And if cuts need to be made, then all cuts should be placed on the table, all cuts should be looked at, including subsidies and including giveaways and deductions that are not part of the norm with our public dollars. That would be good for the taxpayer, and it would be good for the environment, and it would be good in reducing the deficit.