Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Miss Madison Welsh for being named Miss America's Preteen National Teenager 2011. She is a loving sister to Russell and Kyle, and the daughter of Mayor Russell and Heidi Welsh.

After being crowned New Jersey Preteen in April, Madison competed in the weeklong national competition in July against the other forty-nine state winners. The competition was held in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania where Madison was crowned the winner. As Miss America's Preteen National Teenager 2011, Madison will travel across the United States for the next year working with the Boys and Girls Clubs of America, and volunteering in communities across America.

The America's National Teenager competition celebrated its fortieth anniversary this year, making it the longest running pageant for teens in the U.S. Founded in 1970, the pageant promotes leadership, scholastic aptitude and service, and offers more than five million dollars in college scholarships annually. The Preteen division, which Madison won, is for girls between the ages of nine and twelve.

Madam Speaker, Madison Welsh is an outstanding role model among her peers and I congratulate her for being named Miss America's Preteen National Teenager 2011. I wish her the best of luck in her future endeavors.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor five members of the Camden City Fire Department who have provided years of dedicated service to the Camden, New Jersey community. Chief Kevin Hailey, Chief Ralph Roberts, Chief Maurice Wilson, Chief Darryl Lewison and Chief Larry Wilson deserve to be recognized for their hard work and devotion to the Camden City Fire Department.

Chief Kevin Hailey began his many years of service in April of 1981 when he was hired by the Camden City Fire Department. The youngest Fire Captain in the Camden City Fire Department's history, Chief Hailey went on to become Battalion Chief and then Deputy Chief. After 28 years of devoted service to the Camden City Fire Department, Chief Hailey retired on May 1, 2010. Married to his high school sweetheart Melvina since 1989, Chief Hailey is the proud father of one daughter, Kelly.

Chief Ralph Roberts has represented the Camden City Fire Department as Firefighter, Fire Inspector, Fire Captain, Assistant Training Officer, Fire Sub Code Official, Emergency Management Coordinator and New Jersey State Licenses Inspector. An advisor on many city boards who holds a degree in Fire Science, Chief Roberts was an invaluable member of the Camden City Fire Department for 28 years. He retired on June 1, 2010.

Chief Maurice Wilson became a member of the Camden City Fire Department in April of 1982. After being promoted to Captain in February of 1996, he was further promoted to Battalion Chief in April of 2001 and Deputy Chief in January of 2005 before retiring on May 1, 2010 after 28 years with the Camden City Fire Department. Chief Wilson and his wife Betty have two children.

Chief Darryl Lewison was hired by the Camden City Fire Department in 1982 and was

quickly assigned to Ladder 3 on 4 group where he spent the next six years before transferring to Ladder 2. Chief Lewison served as Captain of Engine 7 on 3 group in 1992 and was then assigned to Rescue 1 on 4 group. After eight years, Chief Lewison was transferred to Engine 10 on 4 platoon and continued on to Ladder 2. In 2001, Chief Lewison was made Battalion Chief on 2 group and then transferred to Battalion 1 on 1 group. After 28 years of dutiful service, Chief Lewison retired on May 1, 2010.

Chief Larry Wilson joined the Camden City Fire Department in 1981 after serving as a U.S. Marine from 1972-1975 and attending school at Rutgers University and Camden County College. Chief Wilson was assigned to Engine 6 on 3 group before transferring to both Engine 7 and Ladder 3. After his promotion to Captain of Engine 7 in 1996, Chief Wilson was transferred to Engine 11 and then promoted to Battalion Chief of Battalion 2 on group 3. After 28\1/2\ years of service, Chief Wilson retired on April 1, 2010. The proud father of four children, Chief Wilson and his wife, Joan, have nine grandchildren.

Madam Speaker, the commitment of Chief Kevin Hailey, Chief Ralph Roberts, Chief Maurice Wilson, Chief Darryl Lewison and Chief Larry Wilson to the community of Camden, New Jersey should not go unrecognized. I express my deepest appreciation to these men for their dedication and unwavering loyalty to the Camden City Fire Department.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and memory of Dr. Herman D. James of Voorhees, New Jersey, who died of heart failure in his home on October 2, 2010 at the age of 67. He is survived by his wife Marie, three children and two grandchildren. Dr. James' life and work left a lasting impression on the Rowan University community.

Originally from St. Thomas in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Dr. James relocated to Harlem, New York with his family at the age of ten. As a young man, he developed a love of jazz music, which he later shared with the listeners of Rowan University's radio station, WGLS-FM. Dr. James went on to graduate from Tuskegee University in 1964 with a bachelor's degree and later earned his doctorate in sociology from the University of Pittsburgh.

Becoming the fifth president of the former Glassboro State College (now Rowan University) in 1984, Dr. James began his legacy of striving for academic improvement. Under his leadership, Rowan University saw the launch of its college of engineering as well as the first doctoral program available at a New Jersey state college. Dr. James was also the pioneer of fund-raising for state colleges, resulting in the $100 million donation by Henry and Betty Rowan, the largest gift to a public college at that time. Through the generosity of the Rowan family, Dr. James was able to construct a building for the college of engineering while transforming Rowan University into a more residential campus. Dr. James' love of the classroom persisted even after his retirement from the position of president in 1998, teaching sociology and educational leadership classes up until last year.

Madam Speaker, Dr. Herman D. James' commitment to Rowan University and its students should not go unrecognized. I express my deepest condolences to his family for their loss and pay tribute to the memory of this outstanding individual.

I thank the chairman for yielding.

My friend from Arizona said a few minutes ago, we're in the crazy season. I think on this issue we've been in the crazy season for about two decades. I think when we have a policy that says if the other side doesn't follow the rules, you just ignore it, I think that's crazy. If you have a policy that says if the Chinese manipulate their currency and make it easy to fill the shelves at Wal-Mart but empty the pockets of American workers and you ignore it, I think that's crazy.

So I think the process of going forward when the other side doesn't play by the same rules that we do, that empties factories, empties wallets and empties communities in this country, I think ignoring that is crazy. And I am glad to see that this House on a bipartisan basis for the first time in a long time is saying it's time to stand up for American communities, American companies and American workers and vote ``yes'' on this legislation.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor the life and memory of Robert U. Cassel of Mantua Township, New Jersey, who died September 1st, 2010 at the age of 95. A longtime resident of Gloucester County, Mr. Cassel has left a legacy of dedication and commitment to his community.

Mr. Cassel was born in Philadelphia and graduated from Woodbury High School in 1932. An avid learner, Mr. Cassel continued on to Lebanon Valley College to study biology, leading to his career as a chemist with the Mobil Corporation.

During World War II, Mr. Cassel's supervisor advised him that he was exempted from the draft as a result of the importance of his position. Understanding the call of his country, he ignored that exemption and entered the 94th Infantry Division, arriving in France three months after D-Day. He later became a battalion operations officer in the 301st Infantry Regiment. In that position, he was awarded two Bronze Stars for helping fellow battalion members escape a trap that could have destroyed the unit. During his service, Mr. Cassel collected several battle artifacts that he shared at veteran events and Veterans Day presentations at schools. He later donated these items to the University of Georgia. Until recently, he was also the editor of the Hoodlum News, a quarterly newsletter for the 301st Infantry Association.

Combining his passion for nature with his dedication to the community, Mr. Cassel was a founding member of the Gloucester County Nature Club in 1949. Furthermore, Mr. Cassel embodied a spirit of volunteerism, dedicating his time to the Battleship New Jersey Museum and Memorial, the Mennonite relief warehouse in Lancaster County, and the Boy Scouts of America.

He is survived by his wife Carol and his two daughters, Claire Cassel and Judith Cassel Williams, as well as three grandchildren, two great-grandchildren and a sister. Mr. Cassel is predeceased by his first wife, Eve.

Madam Speaker, Robert U. Cassel's endless dedication to Gloucester County and our country should not go unrecognized. I express my sincere condolences to his family for their loss and pay tribute to the memory of this exceptional man.

I thank my friend for yielding.

I think if we went into any shopping mall or restaurant in America today and asked people who aren't in politics, What would you like to see us do to help put people back to work?, they would say, Well, small businesses create three out of four jobs in the country. Why don't you help them? Why don't you make it so if they create jobs you cut their taxes? Why don't you make it so if they can't get loans, if they have good credit they can get loans and pay them back so it doesn't cost the Treasury anything? And why don't you do this in such a way that it

doesn't add to the deficit, that you offset the cost of doing this by finding other savings to pay for it? Why don't you do that?

That's exactly what this bill does.

Now, I suspect that if the minority's not going to support this bill, it has more to do with the calendar than the content of the bill. In 40 days the voters are going to the polls. And the other side has decided to run their campaign on the basis that nothing good is happening. That's their judgment. We're making a different judgment here: helping small businesses by cutting their taxes, helping small businesses by making credit available to creditworthy borrowers, and helping the American people by creating jobs in a way that doesn't increase the deficit.

Our friends on the other side, Madam Speaker, say there's a climate of fear in Washington. Maybe people are justifiably afraid out in the country that the other side wants to do nothing but say ``no.'' We should vote ``yes'' on this bill.

Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from California just said that, by extending and perpetuating unemployment benefits to families, it will somehow destroy the economic future of these families. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, Mr. Speaker.

I think the reality is, if you take away people's ability to pay their rent or their utility bills or their credit card bills, you absolutely destroy them. The issue before the House today is whether or not 2.5 million Americans, whose unemployment benefits have expired or are about to expire, should get extensions. I emphatically believe that they should.

Now, the argument that we have heard from the other side--first, about not even taking a vote on this issue and now against extending those benefits--is twofold.

The first, which we just heard a version of, is that to extend their unemployment benefits somehow zaps the incentive for people to look for jobs. I would challenge anybody who makes that assertion to go meet 10 or 100 or 500 unemployed people and ask them just how many want ads they have circled, just how many resumes they have sent out, and just how hard they have looked for jobs, and I think that will put that argument to rest.

The second argument is a good faith argument that people do not want to add to the national debt. First of all, this is a selective argument. Nearly two-thirds of the national debt was accumulated during the administrations of Presidents Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and George W. Bush.

Most recently, when the past administration added to the national debt by prosecuting an endless occupation of Iraq with borrowed money, virtually no one on the other side raised this issue. Most recently, when the prior administration dramatically reduced the taxes of the top 5 percent of the people in this country by borrowing the money, virtually no one on the other side raised this issue.

Today, Members on the other side, both in the other body and here, have taken the position that, while extending benefits to janitors and bus drivers and salespeople who have lost their jobs is somehow fiscally irresponsible if you don't offset it, extending tax breaks to the top 5 percent of the people in the country on a permanent basis is completely responsible.

So, in other words, the person who was laid off from her job of cleaning an office building can't get unemployment benefits unless there is a spending cut or a tax increase to pay for it, but the person who owns the office building, who could get a $500,000 tax cut, could get that with borrowed money. This makes no sense.

What does make sense is a ``yes'' vote on today's bill.

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

It must, Mr. Speaker, be a luxury to have the ability to think about the great sweep of economic history since the 1930s, and I enjoyed very much the remarks of my friend from California, but we're here to talk today about 2.5 million Americans who don't have that luxury. These are people who have been out of work for a very long time, and as the first of the month rolls around very soon and there's no rent payment or no mortgage payment in their checking account, as they find it difficult or impossible to pay their utility bills, their health care bills, and they're slipping away, these are the Americans that we're here to talk about this afternoon, 2.5 million Americans.

The extension of unemployment benefits should have been done a very long time ago. There should not have been this wait to extend the benefits. Some people said that we should delay the benefits because people aren't looking hard enough for a job who are on unemployment. I would challenge those who make that assertion to go walk in the shoes of someone on unemployment a little while and see just how difficult it is to find a job.

The problem in America today is not that people aren't looking hard enough for work. It is that frankly not enough jobs are being created. We can all agree to that. How to fix that problem is a subject of debate in this country and on this floor.

But as we have that debate, isn't it the right and good and decent and necessary thing to do to look after the interests of those 2.5 million Americans, and should it not have been done a while ago? Now, why wasn't it? There are Members who in good faith in the other body argued that the bill should not even be voted on, not even be taken up, until there was money set aside to pay for the cost of the extension of the unemployment benefits. That was their argument. Sounds like a fairly plausible argument until you look a little bit beneath the surface and understand these are many of the same Members of the other body who are calling for a permanent extension of tax reductions to the wealthiest Americans.

Let me explain what that means. These are people who are saying in the days of a person who owns an office building and a person who was laid off from a job cleaning the office building, that the following rules ought to apply.

I yield to the gentleman.

I think my friend would say this: that that philosophy says that the person who got laid off from her job cleaning the office building at night can't get unemployment benefits unless we find a way to pay for it, but the guy who owns the office building, who would get a half million dollar a year tax break, should get that tax break whether or not there is money to offset that expenditure.

Now, I just don't understand that. I don't understand a philosophy that says that you have to offset and pay for help to a person who cleans office buildings, but by no means do you have to offset a tax break for a person who owns the building.

If you have that philosophy, shouldn't it, at the very least, have been put up for a vote? Wasn't it wrong for people in the other body to deter that from even coming up for a vote?

They have gotten beyond that hump. Too little, too late in many ways, and we have an opportunity today to do our duty, put that issue squarely on the floor. Our colleagues on both sides should vote ``yes'' and let this House have its say and work its will so that we can address the very real needs of 2.5 million of our fellow citizens.

I urge Members to vote ``yes.''

I thank my friend from California for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, there's been discussion on the floor of the long term. For the long-term unemployed in this country, the long term happened yesterday, or today, actually, the first of the month when the rent comes due and you can't pay it or your mortgage comes due and you can't pay it. They're living in the long term right now, and they need some help. And I think that considering this bill today is the right thing to do.

I do want to reference the remarks which preceded me a few minutes ago by my friend from California, the senior member of the Rules Committee, about how, had the Congress embarked on the path he suggested early in 2009, that the economy would be so much stronger. And he is a fierce and articulate advocate of that point of view. But let's examine what that point of view is and what its track record is.

The gentleman from California argued for cuts in marginal tax rates, mostly distributed to people at the top end--not all, but mostly. He argued for deregulation of the domestic markets and for a policy that pursues that goal. That is a quite accurate description of the economic policies of the administration of President George W. Bush. They cut marginal tax rates--mostly at the upper end of the scale--almost all at the upper end of the scale. They engaged in a systematic practice of deregulation of Wall Street and other industries. And it yielded, quite frankly, the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression.

Were those policies the sole cause of that? Of course not. Is what the American people need a rehashing of that failure? Of course not.

The American people need a policy that will grow jobs, and although the jobs are growing much more slowly than I think any of us hoped, the reality is the economy shed 8\1/2\ million jobs following the policy that my friend from California would like us to go back to; and it has gained just over a million jobs since the beginning of this year. Those are the facts.

Madam Speaker, parliamentary inquiry.

Madam Speaker, is there anything--I note that the custom of the minority is to give about 3 minutes notice on motions to recommit. Is there anything under the rule requiring the minority to give more notice than that of 3 minutes on a motion to recommit?

Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

I thank my friend for yielding.

Mr. Speaker, a lot of Americans seem to have been misled that they are not going to be able to see their doctors under Medicare anymore because of some legislation that came out of here. This bill today makes it emphatically clear that that is emphatically not true.

The bill today restores the full reimbursement rate for doctors and for other providers who see America's senior citizens. The majority of us wanted to make that a permanent fix last summer. Only one minority Member voted for that. Just a few weeks ago, the majority of us wanted to extend that far beyond this. Almost no one on the minority side voted for that. Today, I assume just about everybody is going to vote for this, and I'm glad, but let the record be clear: No one here is prepared to see a day when Medicare doctors turn their patients away. That is not the truth.

I would like to thank my friend from California for his leadership and my friend from Florida for hers. This is what bipartisan leadership looks like.

Mr. Speaker, you know, the risk that we are working against today is not simply a missile striking innocent people halfway around the world. It would be a nuclear IED striking people around the corner.

Make no mistake about it. One of the risks that we confront is that a nuclear-weapon Iran that can make highly enriched uranium might well share that highly enriched uranium with a terrorist group, and the next SUV that is parked in Times Square might have a nuclear IED in it. Iran could very well be the source of such an attack. We must stop that, and this legislation today goes in that direction.

To those who say that the Iranians don't fear sanctions, then why did they try to strike this deal with Brazil and Turkey on the eve of the U.N. sanctions?

To people who say that energy sanctions won't work, then why have the Iranians tried to embark on a crash course to replace gasoline with natural gas?

This is the right move at the right time. I thank my chairman for authoring it, and I urge a ``yes'' vote.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Ronald Gettelfinger, president of the United Auto Workers, and longtime advocate of workers everywhere. I stand to recognize him for his vision for America.

Mr. Gettelfinger's first experience with Ford Motor Company's labor unions occurred in 1964 when he started working as a chassis line repairman at the Louisville Assembly Plant. After a few years, his co- workers elected him committeeperson, bargaining chair, and president of the local union. He worked his way up through UAW Region 3, was elected national vice president in 1988, and president in 2002. His second term as president will expire with the election of a new president at the UAW convention in Detroit later this week.

Mr. Gettelfinger's down-to-earth personality has been a huge asset to him as UAW president. He has stood by the Union's mission to secure economic and social justice for all people, and believes that every person and every job is important.

Mr. Speaker, Ron Gettelfinger's leadership as president of the United Auto Workers and advocate for health care reform should not go unrecognized. I wish him the best of luck in his future endeavors.