Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I come today to the floor to point out something that's really already been pointed out in the press, and that is, as they say, that the Democrats, unfortunately, have horrifically failed as the majority party getting most anything done. Now, they made promises after promises to help the American people, and maybe it's no surprise that most of those promises have come to naught and have been broken.

This is most evident by the recent Democrat budget. It includes a massive $683 billion tax increase which only further burdens our children, kills jobs, hurts small businesses, and basically just punishes the American family. And worst of all, this budget was created to finance wasteful spending and the special interests here in Washington.

So what happened to all of those promises of cleaning up Washington and cutting spending? Well, it seems they simply got lost in the shuffle of all of their spending taxpayers' dollars.

Madam Speaker, I rise today as a member of the bipartisan Congressional Prayer Caucus to formally acknowledge the importance of prayer in American life and American history.

Today I am honored to launch the first of what I hope will be weekly reminders of our country's need for prayer. I do so by reading a proclamation given by President Ronald Reagan in 1983 when he said, ``From the birth of our Republic, prayer has been vital to the whole fabric of American life.''

As we crossed and settled the continent, built a Nation in freedom, endured war and critical struggles to become a sentinel of liberty, we repeatedly turned to our Maker for strength and guidance in achieving the awesome tasks before us.

Whether at the ordeal of the Revolutionary War, the stormy days of binding the 13 colonies into one country, the Civil War, or other moments of trial over the years, we have turned to God for His help. As we are told in II Chronicles 7:14: ``If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.''

Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chairman, I come to the floor in appreciation of the underlying intent of both the amendment and the underlying bill as well.

But I am mindful of the fact, as I come from the great State of New Jersey and as we think about the issue at hand, and that is our beaches and the shores generally, I was just talking with someone recently that due to the high cost of energy and the high cost of

gasoline, a lot of my constituents, quite honestly, won't be able to even enjoy the Jersey shore this summer, to ``go down below,'' as we call it, down to the Jersey shore to enjoy it and enjoy whatever improvements that this amendment, which I support, and the underlying bill, which I support, would bring to us.

So the point I just want to spend a moment on is the fact that while we debate these tertiary issues, the fundamental issue that folks back in my district are concerned about is how are we going to afford in the first place to get about our State of New Jersey, to get to the shore, to enjoy our vacation, to enjoy the beaches if Congress is not doing anything whatsoever to address the high cost of gasoline and to address the high cost of energy in the State of New Jersey and the rest of the country as well.

Here we are now in the ides of April, the middle of April. This is about, let's see, 12, 13, 14, 15, the 16th month now into this, the 110th Congress under the Democrat leadership. And we have to ask ourselves one seminal question, one basic question: What has the 16th month of Democrat leadership brought us in a whole host of areas? And I will get to the energy issue in a minute.

Well, we see in the area of food prices, my constituents also tell me that the price of food, when they go to the A&P or the grocery stores every day, whatever the store is, are going through the roof. The housing crisis. We will go to any committee here. I serve on the Financial Services Committee. We know we are in a terrible housing crisis right now, a subprime crisis affecting credit markets across the country. Fuel costs I have already mentioned. A recession. You know, for the first time in years, we're talking about an economic recession. For all the time that the Republicans were in control of this House and in control of this government, we saw that they were in booming economic times. Sixteen months now into the 110th Congress in a Democrat leadership, off the map on food costs, housing costs, into recession. If that has happened in 16 months, we wonder what will happen if they have another 16 months.

So I would ask whether this Congress could do what my constituents are asking us to do. Maybe address these issues such as beach issues and where we can go on vacation, but can we do those after we get to the more seminal issues, the more fundamental issues, issues that strike at the heart of where America is living right now, issues that strike at, well, their pocketbook and where their money is really going to right now, and that is energy costs.

The other day I just drove out in my driveway of my house. I went down to the main road. And there at the gas station, the price of a gallon of diesel fuel was $4 a gallon. Amazing. $4 a gallon. That means that truckers--those same truckers who have to get down to the Jersey Shore to bring supplies and what have you for vacationers who want to enjoy the beaches and what have you--truckers, I am told, have to spend upwards of $1,000 to fill up their diesel tanks in their trucks to get about our State.

New Jersey is a commuter State. New Jersey is a hub State, a transportation State. Unless Congress is ready to commit itself to really fundamentally look at the underlying causes of the high cost of energy, of the high cost of gasoline, of the high cost of diesel fuel, unless we are ready to work across both sides of the aisle on these issues, these other issues will come to naught, will be of little importance to my constituents if they are stranded at home, if their husbands or their wives don't have jobs because they can't afford to put gas into the car or diesel into the trucks.

So I just come to the floor to raise these issues now and ask that, as important as these beach issues are, can we not really begin to address what the constituents are addressing?

Later on in the evening, I would like to say that there are some solutions, there are some solutions that the American public would like us to begin to address. There are some answers to the fundamental reasons of why the price of gasoline and diesel fuel is going through the roof. There are some basic changes that Congress, this Congress, could be making right now to the energy supply in this country that would help to drive down the cost of energy in this country so that Americans, families in my district and in yours, will be able to address this problem and not have a problem of high energy cost anymore.

Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chairman, I appreciate the comments by the sponsor, and I support the commonsense approach to this amendment as well.

Coming from the great State of New Jersey, who has had when it comes to beach issues over the last 20-some odd years, during which time I had the privilege of serving in the State legislature and had to deal with some of the same issues that are being dealt with right here and now, I appreciate what is being done this evening with regard to realtime recovering and realtime information coming in. New Jersey, I think, is literally on the cutting edge of this information right now. New Jersey is on the cutting edge, having addressed these issues over the last decade, and I appreciate what is being attempted to be done for the rest of the country as well.

That being said, I just want to reiterate my point that I made earlier this evening that here we are back in Congress again this week, and a lot of people are asking me back in the district, what are some of the major issues that you will be working on when you return to Washington this week?

At a town hall meeting and discussions back over the weekend, I gave them a breakdown, this being one of them. And they asked me, wait, you are going to be talking about beach issues? You are going to be talking about some of these other suspension bills we had earlier in the week and I anticipate having later on in the week?

But each time, no matter where I was, my constituents asked me the same question: Well, when is Congress going to begin the debate, when is Congress going to begin the discussion, whether it is in committees or on the floor or elsewhere, to try to address the problem that is really hitting us the hardest here back at home in the Fifth Congressional District, that is the top of the State of New Jersey, the issue that is hitting us the most in the pocketbook here in the great State of New Jersey? And, of course, what they were referring to is the price of energy.

We have just gone through a little bit of a cold snap in the State of New Jersey, as other parts of the country have as well, so for that reason we have seen the use of home fuel oil go up, naturally. It is a scary thing now when you see the delivery truck come to your house to deliver oil to fill up your oil tank, because you know as soon as that man is done delivering that 100 gallons or 250 gallons to your tank in your basement or in the ground or what have you, he is going to hand you a bill at the end of that delivery, and that bill can wipe out your savings for the week, wipe out the dollars that you may have planned to set aside to buy food, to buy medicine, to pay other expenses you were looking forward to have to spend that week.

So the people are asking, when are we going to be doing something? Unfortunately, we are still not doing it right now. Here we are, 16 months into a Democrat-controlled Congress, and still nothing has been done about it.

I refer back, just to give a little element of time to all this, to the chart I have right up here in front of us, to the fact that we do not have a Democrat energy policy to try to address these seminal issues, major issues that are affecting us. Take a look at what the prices are and the result of not having an energy policy to address this.

As this chart shows, the price of a barrel of crude oil when the Democrats came to power just 16 months ago was $58.31 cents a barrel. Fifty-eight bucks a barrel. Here we are less than 2 years later, a year-and-a-half later, and the price of a barrel of crude oil today is $113 a barrel. It is because of that huge increase in the price of the barrel that you and I have to pay so much when that man comes to deliver the fuel oil for our house or when we go down to the gas station as well.

Fifty-three cents on the dollar when you buy gas at the gas station or are buying fuel oil for your house is the price of crude oil. So when you wonder why it is that you are paying so much at the pump or you are paying so much for delivery to your house, it is because it has gone from 58 bucks to 113 bucks. Not over the last 10 years. Not over the last 6 years, or something like that. Not over the period of time when the Republicans were in control. No, not over that entire span of time. But just in the last 16 months under Democrat control we have seen the price of fuel oil spike and go through the roof.

The result of that has been what? The result has been, besides the fact that you now have to spend most of your money going to your fuel costs, the price also has translated into a ripple effect on the price of food, so when you go to the food store, those are through the roof. It has a ripple effect with regard to the overall economy, and so that is why Alan Greenspan was on TV just about 2 weeks ago now saying that he too is agreeing with other economists in this country saying we have entered into a recession.

So if you remember back how strong the economy was, how strong Wall Street was just about 18 months ago, now we see under the Pelosi premium of no energy policy, the result is what you see today.

I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chairman, the previous gentleman was most accurate in his portrayal of what the problem is. Let me just dig into it a little bit more.

Again, as I said before, I support the ideas of the amendment that we are discussing right now in the underlying legislation. My heart just goes out for my constituents at home who may not be able to enjoy the benefits of such, the beaches of the great State of New Jersey and others along the eastern seaboard, simply because, a very practical matter with the high price of energy, the high price of gas, they simply may not be able to afford to get there.

I think I saw it in some news report the other day, how it was characterized, the point that I made earlier and the previous gentleman just made, as the chart just shows, the lack of a plan to deal with the energy problem in this country by the Democrat majority has brought us in this 110th Congress, this huge spike, this huge increase in the price of oil.

As the gentleman explained, it went from $58 per barrel of oil now up to $113, almost $114 per barrel of oil. The paper I think I was reading the other day, I heard it someplace, was this can most appropriately be called, not a Democrat problem, a premium that we are paying for the price of oil. Perhaps, appropriately, the paper called it the Pelosi premium because it comes during the time of this Congress headed by the Democrats.

The previous gentleman from Georgia was saying that, and he laid out very eloquently, that the other side of the aisle had campaigned on, and the Speaker said frequently they had a plan. Well, would that it be that they actually had a plan and began to implement that was beneficial, that would be beneficial, but they have had some sort of a plan.

I have to point this out to the gentleman from Georgia. They have had some suggestions as to what we can be doing with the price of gasoline. Let me just run through a couple of them. One of their suggestions to deal with the price of gasoline was a 50-cent increase per gallon Federal gas tax, which was proposed by the Energy and Commerce chairman.

So we are already paying $3.50 or so for a gallon of gasoline at the pump. The Energy and Commerce chairman said how do we deal with that issue? Let's add a 50-cent increase per gallon Federal gas tax on top of that. That's one part of their plan.

The second plan the other side of the aisle, the Democrat majority proposed to deal with the high price of energy, was a $150 million war surtax. That was under a plan proposed by the Appropriations chairman, David Obey. We are already paying a high price for gasoline, we are already paying a high price for diesel, home heating fuel. Let's add insult to injury and add a $150 billion war surtax on top of that that you and I would have to pay.

Was that the end of their plan? No, they had a couple of other ideas. Defense Appropriations Chairman John Murtha and Representative Jim McGovern said low- and middle-income taxpayers should have to pay 2 percent added to their tax bill while higher income taxpayers would take an additional 12 to 15 percent added tax as well. There again, how do you deal with this problem, higher taxes.

Finally, a final proposal to deal with this situation from the Democrat majority, a 5-cent increase per gallon gasoline gas tax was proposed by Representative James Oberstar to pay for infrastructure. This proposal, as you may recall, would raise the Federal gas tax to 23.4 cents a gallon from the current 18.4 cents. This was made last summer.

So every proposal that they have had suggested, every proposal that we have heard from the Democrat side of the aisle to deal with the energy crisis in this country, to deal with the fact that energy costs for a barrel of oil going $58 up to $114, their solution to the fact that we are paying $3.25, $3.50, $4 for diesel, their solution so far has done nothing to lower the price. It has done everything to raise the price.

To add insult to injury, their proposal is to add even more by adding additional taxes and surtaxes on top of that.

Madam Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

I move to strike the last word.

I thank the Chair. And I appreciate the gentleman from Tennessee having come to the floor a moment ago to address this energy and the like. To be honest, that's the only way that we are going to be able to find solutions to these major issues that we need to address, whether it is the Iraq war situation, or this major issue of energy costs in this country.

Obviously, we have been able to find common ground when it comes to, I would catch it, slightly less significant issues dealing with beach quality and what have you. Now if we can find that same comity when it comes to the Iraq war and energy, then we'll be moving in the right direction.

That being said, the gentleman can't disagree with some of the facts that have been set out here for the last evening, and this will probably be my last comment for the night; and that is that the Democrat majority, prior to becoming the majority, did point out some problems with regard to energy prices prior to coming into the majority.

And the gentleman from Georgia went through a litany of quotes from Democrat leadership citing the problem, and making a promise that the Democrat majority had a solution to those problems. I'm eager to see what those solutions are. I would like to extend a hand across the other side of the aisle to work with them, if those solutions were ever forthcoming.

As I indicated in my last comments, the only proposals that I've seen so far from the other side of the aisle have been restrictive or increasing to the cost of energy. They were the two or three tax increases that I ran through before, the 50 cent increase per gallon gasoline Federal gas hike proposed, the $150 billion war surtax or the 5 cent increase per gallon tax hike, all proposals from the other side of the aisle. None of those things will lower the cost of energy. All of those things will raise the price that you and I and everyone else have to pay at the pump.

What we may want to do is look to see what other countries are doing with regard to energy costs in general. Let me just run down real quickly some of these.

Over in China, three or four things. One, China has expanded its natural gas infrastructure by constructing pipe lines. Unfortunately, the Democrats have opposed natural gas production in this country and natural gas infrastructure improvements in the country in general. And the chart that we had up previously showed that as far as offshore.

Secondly, China is rapidly expanding its refining capacity. Unfortunately, Democrats have repeatedly voted against expanding America's refinery capacity. I don't think we've had any new refineries built in some several decades.

Thirdly, China is ambitiously developing its nuclear power energy which plans to spend $50 billion on 30 additional nuclear reactors within the next 15 years. Again, unfortunately, Democrats consider the notion of increasing nuclear power generation in the U.S. basically as off the table.

And finally, China's planning on constructing many new large scale hydro electric projects over the forecasted period, including an 18.2 gigawatt Three Gorges dam project which is expected to come in in 2009. Again, unfortunately, Democrats have actively opposed new hydro electric power plants here in the United States.

So I will end where I began. The gentleman said that we should be concerned about how much money is going to Saudi Arabia and Dubai and all of the things that they're able to build with that oil. I agree.

I wish all of our American tax dollars and American gasoline dollars that we pay at the pump weren't going overseas. But right now, 63 percent of our energy sources are dependent on foreign sources of energy and growing more every year.

What we need to do is make America more self-reliant when it comes to energy. You do that by what we've talked about all evening. Don't tax it, don't raise the cost of production, don't restrict the production here in the United States, don't restrict the ideas of new efficient energy alternatives and the like, but allow it to grow using ingenuity of Americans insight and entrepreneurs, so that we do not have to be more dependent every day on foreign, unreliable sources that are a threat to this country, are a threat to our national security, and put our young men and women in harm's way on the points with regard to war, as the gentleman from Tennessee was pointing out.

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

I thank the gentleman.

As I so often say when I come to the floor, in looking back 16 months, this country has been under the control of the Democrat-led Congress. What has those 16 months wrought? We have higher food prices, a recession now in the economy with which almost everyone agrees, even former Chairman Greenspan, housing prices basically in a free fall down and, of course, energy prices going through the roof.

You made a comment about gasoline prices being up to almost $4 a gallon by the summer. Of course, diesel fuel already, in my neck of the woods, the great State of New Jersey, is at $4 a gallon.

It amazes me each time I drive past the pump. I don't use diesel. Truckers most often do. Farming equipment on the farms do. Of course, I am amazed that people are still able to make a living.

But 16 months under a Democrat-controlled rule here in the House of Representatives, what has it wrought? We have higher food prices, a recession in the economy, free fall of the housing prices and energy prices through the roof, causing hardships for all Americans.

I come from the State of New Jersey. When I go home, I just went home for the weekend, and I talked to my friends and constituents back home. They are paying the price, at the pump, at the food store, everywhere, and it's creating a real hardship for the American family.

When the American family sits down each week and pays their bills, gets out their checkbook, and say how are we going to pay this month's mortgage payment, this month's rent payment, first they have to pay all of these other expenses.

At the end of the week, they realize the money is just not in the checkbook anymore. One of the root causes is the price of fuel. They are probably scratching their heads saying what is the Democrat-led majority in the House doing about it? Where is that plan that you were referring to that the Democrats campaigned on 18 months ago before they took over the majority? Where is that plan during these last 16 months now that they have been in the majority?

My constituents wait. You and I wait.

In the meantime, let's take a look at the facts. Democrats make all sorts of claims about the price of energy, about the price of gasoline prices. I would like to address just three or four of them.

First of all, one of the most frequent things, and you see hearings on this over and over, Democrats will say, well, it's because of America, it's because of those American oil companies that we have skyrocketing prices. Let's get into the facts a little bit about that, though. U.S. energy companies are not even in the top 10 when you look at total proven oil reserves and gas reserves in the entire world.

For example, ExxonMobil has less than 5 percent of the stock held by Saudi Aramco. A full 53 percent of the price we pay for gasoline when we go to the pump is related to the price of the crude oil that goes into it, a world commodity.

Can Democrats really accuse American oil companies of so influencing prices when they own such a marginally small amount of the total world supply? When we think about it, this is a part and parcel of the Democrat blame America first doctrine here too in energy.

Secondly, Democrats say that the U.S. needs to decrease demand for oil. We have to live more modestly, I guess, is what that really translates out to be.

It turns out the facts are this, in recent years U.S. American families' demand for oil and all its uses has actually begun to stabilize, and we have seen over a period of time an actual decrease in the amount of use. Meanwhile, world demand for oil has actually increased to 84 million barrels a year. That's an increase of 16 million barrels just over the last decade.

While we are willing and able and want to work with the other side of the aisle to come up with ways to conserve fuel, the facts point to the fact that we should not be blaming America first with regard to increased use of oil. But it's the rest of the world that is just increasing their consumption, which is a supply and demand factor.

Thirdly, Democrats are off to say that the Americans already have reliable access to energy supplies. Well, when we get into the facts, it refutes what the Democrats are saying.

The U.S., as a matter of fact, is the only, the only industrial Nation in the entire world that locks up 85 percent of its open available deep sea energy reserves. Let me repeat that number again, 85 percent of our reserves offshore and elsewhere are locked up. We can't get to them. You and I can't use them today, our children can't use them tomorrow, grandchildren in the future, they are locked up under their plan.

Even worse, we have not even built a new refinery in this country for the last 32 years. As a result of these factors, 63 percent of our energy supplies that we should be able to use right here in this country are obtained from foreign sources instead. The Democrat plan makes us even more reliant on foreign sources, those same foreign sources that are unreliable, unstable and oftentimes hostile to the United States as well.

Fourthly, Democrats claim that the Federal Government, the bureaucrats here in Washington, must micromanage, if you will, and regulate these American oil companies. Again, what are the facts. The facts are that in 2007, these very same American oil companies and themselves spent $183 billion in new investment. What does that do, that leads to the development of more efficient environmental fuels on the market.

Meanwhile, the Democrat majority has voted to raise taxes four separate times just during the 110th Congress. I began my remarks asking what has 16 months under Democrat control wrought when it comes to this country, well, one point there is four separate times taxes have gone up during this Congress. And where does that end up being paid from? Well, tomorrow is April 15, tax day, and we know who pays. It comes down not on the corporations and big business, it is comes down on the consumer.

So soaring prices are the result of supply and demand, and the best approach to energy efficiency and cost reduction is one that is market based. The worst approach is no plan whatsoever, which is what we have seen by the other side of the aisle, and a lack of a plan that engages in such rhetoric as blame America first, restrict the development of efficient energy resources that are American based, and the worst plan is to make the United States and the citizens of this country even more reliant on those unstable and hostile regimes.

I thank the gentleman for coming to the floor tonight and reminding all of America about the dilemma that we face going in, both in the short term with the family budget today and the future, and the great need we have to have a plan put in place and implemented. I look forward to working with you to achieve such.

Madam Chairman, I thank the gentleman.

As we come to the floor now and the Democrats talk about beaches, my constituents in the great State of New Jersey suffer. They are suffering from unrelenting increases in the price of gas, up almost a dollar now since the Democrats took control of this House. So as my constituents suffer from higher food costs, all related energy costs; as my constituents suffer from higher heating costs, all related to energy costs; as my constituents suffer from the higher cost of living in general, again, related to energy costs, all of them should be asking what is it that the Democrat Congress is doing to address this problem?

Well, the short answer is nothing really helpful. And the long answer is really potentially driving up the costs even higher.

Let me give you two quick points. First, the Democrats have voted four times now, four times, to raise taxes so to make sure the discovering and making sure that America's energy independence is that much harder. Secondly, they have voted now to lock up almost 85 percent of known specific energy resources in this country. What does that mean? What does that translate to the consumer? Again, the Democrats are making it harder for America to become energy independent from foreign oil.

Now is the time for all Americans everywhere across this country to ask what is its Democrat Congress doing. The short answer is nothing much. The long answer is potentially driving up the cost for fuel for all of them. Now is, therefore, the time for all of us to come to the floor to work together for a change and to make sure that America can, in fact, become energy independent. Now is the time for Democrats to be working not against the American consumer, but for him instead.

Madam Chairman, I move to strike the last word.

Madam Chairman, I come to the floor also to speak in support of the Flake amendment. I was in my office almost a half-hour ago now when I saw the debate on the floor and my friend and colleague Mr. Flake was here speaking about his amendment, and I thought I would come down to hear his closing remarks and hear the other side then say that they agreed to the amendment, because I thought, in essence, this was an amendment that both sides of the aisle could reach across and find unanimity and agreement with, if we believed the rhetoric that we heard last year and if we believe the rhetoric we hear oftentimes from the other side of the aisle about their desires to rein in spending, to address the earmark situation problem and to work with Republicans to try to deal with it, as we heard during their campaign to come to the majority, as they have, and now on the floor as well.

To my surprise, and perhaps I should not be surprised to find that as of this time, a half-hour later into the debate on a simple amendment to say that we should not be having earmarks in this bill, a bill that never had earmarks before, the other side of the aisle, the Democrat side of the aisle, cannot agree to it.

Earlier, when the general debate on this bill was on the floor, I came to the floor and said that in light of all the issues that we are discussing right now, it is amazing we are about to go into the weekend break discussing beaches as opposed to some other fundamentally important issue striking at the hearts and the wallets of the American taxpayers and the citizens of the State of New Jersey as well, one principally which was the high cost of oil.

The Democrats have been in charge of this House now for almost a year and a quarter, and during that time we have seen the price of gas at the local gasoline stations go up by almost a buck. You would think that would be something first and foremost that they would be addressing. But, no, they are addressing a spending bill and beaches, as we have before us. Again, maybe I should not be surprised, because wasn't it Hillary Clinton who said that she has more ideas on spending than there are dollars in D.C.?

Well, in light of the fact that the other side of the aisle, the Democrat majority, will not even consider to support the Flake amendment, which would try to rein in some of that wasteful, wanton abuse that we see in earmarks here, apparently the Democrat House leadership is taking a page from Hillary Clinton's playbook. They too have more ideas on spending than there are dollars in D.C. to spend.

It was just indicated a moment ago, well, this is not the purpose of the bill, to do earmarks. Well, if it is not the purpose of the bill, then it should be an easy lift to support this amendment to eliminate earmarks from the bill.

Secondly, someone suggested from the other side, well, if we are going to do it in this one, we should do it in all other bills like this. I agree, and I am sure Mr. Flake would come to the floor as well and say he would put this in any bill coming to the floor, to say we should not have earmarks, and I think he just rose to that point.

Finally, the point was made, I think from this side of the aisle, well, it hasn't been done in bills like this before. What a better time than right now? And I commend the gentleman, Mr. Flake for bringing it to the floor. If not now, then when? If both sides of the aisle are as adamantly opposed to abuses of earmarks as both sides of the aisle say they are, why shouldn't they support the amendment by Mr. Flake?

Madam Chairman, I yield to the gentleman from Arizona.

Madam Chairman, I yield back my time.

And I thank the gentlelady from Tennessee for all of your work on this matter and others as well, shining the light of day on the budget process here in the House under Democrat control of this legislature.

That last point, under Democrat control, here we find ourselves 15 months into the 110th Congress under a new Democrat majority in this House, and we have to ask that basic question, What has that Democrat control of 15 months brought? Well, in outside groups in the media, it has been reported this has been one of the most inefficient and ineffective Congresses in passing legislation out of the House and making it to the President's desk and getting it signed, in most people's memory. And that is a bad thing when it comes to trying to solve the problems that are addressing America's families and America's pocketbook as well.

I would like to spend my couple of minutes personalizing this budget process from the great State of New Jersey and other residents of my State as well and how it impacts upon them.

New Jerseyans are already overtaxed. Just recently, the legislature in Trenton, the State capital, raised taxes. They raised the sales tax, they raised corporate taxes, they raised user fees and what have you. And now there is talk about, in our State, maybe doubling or tripling the tolls on the road, and not to speak, of course, about property taxes which are going through the roof in our State. So New Jersey families are already taxed.

What do we see here in the Congress under Democrat control with the budget that they have passed through this House? Well, for New Jerseyans it would amount to around $3,700 increase, a $3,700 increase in taxes on the American family or the New Jersey family. More of their hard-earned money being taken from them and sent to Washington.

And what else? Well, another independent analysis, this one done by the Heritage Foundation, shows that folks in my district, the Fifth District in New Jersey, which my district represents, they would lose upwards to 2,000 jobs. So mind you, the budget that the Democrats have passed would do two things: raise our taxes in my State by around $3,700 for the average family, and we would lose 2,000 jobs. All a bad thing now under the Democrat's Congress.

So while it may have been one of the most ineffective and inefficient Congresses under the Democrat leadership, they are doing some things all bad.

Let me take a moment, if I may, to address three points that went through the budgetary process when the bills came through the committee.

If you hadn't been turned on C-SPAN from 10:30 in the morning when the bills came through with the Budget Committee initially until around 1 o'clock the next morning when the bill finally came out, you may have missed exactly what the Budget Committee did under the leadership of the Democrat Conference.

Let me touch upon three of them. Democrats proposed their budget. Republicans tried to take a bad bill and tried to make it better with a number of amendments, and I will go through very quickly, if I may, three of those amendments. In each instance, when we took our amendments and said, Here is an idea that maybe would make your bill a little bit better, they voted

unanimously, and it shows the bipartisanship is not there in that committee, unanimously against our ideas.

First idea. AMT, alternative minimum tax. We suggested that this very harsh tax should be repealed. Remember, it was the AMT started under 1969 under a Democrat Congress, in the 1990s under a Democrat President, Bill Clinton. We Republicans tried to repeal it. He said no. Now we said we have to get rid of this unfair tax that in just a couple of years from now, around 34 million American families would see their taxes go up incredibly. They said ``no'' to our amendment.

Secondly, again, Democrats unanimously voted against another amendment that we suggested to their bill with regard to earmarks. We all have problems with earmarks. It made the news heavily in the last months, what have you. We see the waste, fraud, and abuse there. We suggested we could save a billion dollars in earmarks and let's appropriate it over to veterans and for their good causes. That was our amendment. They voted unanimously to oppose it.

And finally in the area of Social Security. You would think here is one area that there would be bipartisanship, that they would reach across the aisle and try to get something done. Again, no go. Earmarks, again, was the basis of our areas that we thought we could save some money. There was so much waste, fraud, and abuse with their earmarks. We said, Let's save some of the money there. Let's make sure that Social Security is here for seniors today and for the next generation and next generation. Let's stop robbing from the Social Security trust fund. We put in an amendment to do that. What do the Democrats do once again? Unanimously they voted against that amendment as well.

The amendments all went down. The bill passed as the Democrats initially proposed it, in essence, and that bill, of course, is bad for my constituents, bad for New Jerseyans as we will be losing jobs, seeing our taxes go up.

So, again, I close where I began, commending the lady for bringing this information to the American public as we work together to make it a better situation.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I rise today to voice my strong opposition to this, the largest tax increase on the American family in history. The average New Jersey taxpayer under this plan will see their tax increase by over $3,700. That is the second highest increase of any State in the Union under this budget. With property taxes in my State soaring out of control and the high cost of living in New Jersey, the last thing any member from the New Jersey delegation should want to do is to drastically increase the Federal taxes on New Jersey families, as the Democrat budget now does.

What about jobs? In an independent analysis by the Heritage Foundation for the Fifth District that I represent, we will lose 2,000 jobs due to this tax increase.

So I hope that everyone who is watching this debate will pay attention very closely to see how their Member from their State will vote, because if they vote in favor of this, they will see their taxes go up by around four grand in the future.

Last week, the day this budget was passed in committee, we had one of those late nights. It began around 10:30 in the morning; it ended a little after midnight. During that time, almost 30 amendments were tried by our side of the aisle, and almost every one of them was voted ``no'' and defeated by the Democrat side of the aisle.

Now, because that debate went so late in the evening, let me recap some of those, which I think was an intriguing debate that we had. I would like to go through and highlight a number of commonsense, good government initiatives that the Democrats voted against on every one.

One, Democrats unanimously voted against totally repealing the AMT.

Two, Democrats unanimously voted against all attempts to rescue Social Security and Medicare and make these and other programs sustainable for future generations.

Third, Democrats unanimously voted against eliminating air-drop earmarks and dedicating $1 billion, that was just indicated, for veterans programs.

Democrats also remain committed, apparently, to eliminating the 10 percent bracket for low-income individuals and raising taxes on families by $500 per child and reinstating the marriage penalty and reimposing the death tax.

The Democrats also unanimously voted against protecting the Social Security surplus. Instead, what they did, they chose to raid that fund simply to pay for more of their earmarks.

Democrats also unanimously voted against strengthening PAYGO. Instead, they preserved gaping holes that allow them to scam the system with the rules that maintain the guise of fiscal responsibility.

Democrats also unanimously voted against putting the House Members on record every time they vote to increase the debt.

Even more astoundingly, Democrats unanimously voted against their own legislation, a leading Blue Dog reform bill that would have required greater transparency and accountability in the budget process. Instead, what do they do, as with so many other good things, they put this commonsense idea off to another day.

Mr. Chairman, in conclusion, I want the American people to realize and understand that the Democrat members of the committee unanimously voted against all the proposals I just mentioned. They had the chance to improve this legislation. They refused to do so. And I encourage all of my colleagues to vote against this terrible budget and the largest tax increase burden on the American family.

Madam Speaker, as a member of the Congressional Caucus on Hellenic Affairs, I am proud to congratulate the nation of Greece on the celebration of the 187th anniversary of independence. Ancient Greece is commonly thought of as the foundation for Western civilization. The Roman Empire borrowed much from Greek culture, including politics, philosophy, art, architecture, and language; and subsequently spread these ideas throughout Europe.

However, the country often thought of as the ``Cradle of Democracy'' was conquered and governed by various empires for centuries. On March 25, 1821, the Greek people rose up against Ottoman oppression and declared their independence. The Greeks later became the first ethnic group under the Ottoman Empire to gain independent sovereign power.

America's early Founding Fathers adopted the concept of federalism, an idea influenced by the ancient Greek ``city-state,'' a small region ruled locally, but within the framework of a larger cultural area. The United States has been proud to stand with the people of Greece as they confronted oppression, solidified their democracy, and became part of the vibrant European economy.

Both of our nations understand that even after independence is gained, it must be carefully guarded. Brave citizens must be willing to sacrifice their lives in order to protect liberty. Just as the U.S. and Greece have struggled to survive after the initial moment of independence was earned, we must continue to foster the causes of freedom and democracy.

Again, I congratulate the Greek people on this historic celebration. This anniversary is a time to remember the sacrifices of the past, to take pride in your nation, and to look ahead to a future of promise.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize four individuals who have been named by the Ramapo College Foundation Board of Governors as the 2008 Distinguished Citizens. This honor highlights their personal and professional commitment to advance higher education and their significant service to the community.

James E. Jaworski, Esq.; Patricia B. Shrader, Esq.; Drew Nieporent, and Edward P. Wallace, Jr. each support Ramapo College in their own unique ways while exemplifying the school's commitment to high standards of educational excellence.

In addition, these individuals are recognized for their dedication and unfailing commitment to our community. Our communities are only as strong as the people and organizations that are willing to put their time, effort, and energy into building them. I applaud Ramapo College for honoring these individuals and, in doing so, the true spirit of community that helps to make our country a symbol of strength and hope worldwide.

Ramapo College of New Jersey is located in Mahwah, New Jersey. Designated as ``New Jersey's Public Liberal Arts College,'' Ramapo is a comprehensive institution of higher education whose faculty and staff dedicate themselves to the promotion of teaching and learning within a strong liberal arts based curriculum. Its curricular emphasis includes the liberal arts and sciences, social sciences, fine and performing arts, and the professional programs within a residential and sustainable living and learning environment.

It is an honor to represent such fine people and institutions in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Madam Speaker, I am pleased to congratulate the borough of Ramsey, New Jersey, on its centennial celebration. Today, March 10, is the 100th anniversary of the incorporation of Ramsey.

Ramsey is located at the foothills of the Ramapo Mountains in northeast New Jersey and covers 5.9 square miles. Dutch, English, Scottish, and German settlers were among the first colonists to live in Ramsey. The Old Stone House was built as a Dutch colonial farmhouse in the 1700s, and it is still preserved today. A gristmill was erected in the mid 1780s, and six decades later a railroad station was assembled-- both brought commerce and development to the area. Ramsey quickly became known as the strawberry capital, due to the large amounts of strawberries grown in the region and then shipped to other States.

Today, Ramsey is the site of six churches, three parks, four public schools, and a public library. Several scenes from The Sopranos episode ``The Happy Wander'' were shot at the Maple Shade Motel, and Ramsey was also a setting for scenes from the 2006 film World Trade Center. Several notable Americans have resided in Ramsey, including Ryan Grant, running back for the Green Bay Packers; Danny Aiello, a stage and film star; and Ryan McGinley, a photographer. Perhaps the most distinguished resident to call Ramsey ``home'' was Army Master Sergeant Charles Ernest Hosking, who received a Medal of Honor for self-sacrificially saving the lives of several of his commanders during the Vietnam war.

The borough of Ramsey is rich with historical, cultural, educational, and recreational institutions. For 100 years, Ramsey has been the cherished residence of many Americans. It is my hope that the borough of Ramsey will continue to be a vibrant community for many years to come.

Madam Speaker, I am proud to congratulate the Republic of Korea on the 89th anniversary of the March 1 Independence Movement against Japan's colonial rule.

It is especially fitting for Americans to join Koreans in celebrating this day. Many believe that the Fourteen Points, outlined by U.S. President Wilson at the Paris Peace Conference, helped to inspire the Samil Movement to protest against the restrictive Japanese government.

On March 1, 1919, hundreds of Koreans participated in peaceful rallies to promote liberation. Some were upset by the burdensome taxation system that often led to famine or slavery. Many Korean Christians, including entire churches, protested the strict religious regulations enforced by the Japanese.

Across the country, nationalist leaders simultaneously read the independence declaration out loud in public. These readings motivated thousands of demonstrators to join the cause of freedom, and the movement grew. The Japanese responded by killing thousands of protestors. In at least one case, Korean men were driven into a church and burned alive. However, it took the Japanese 12 months, and the assistance of the army and navy, to quell the uprising. In the end, the Japanese government was forced to adopt more lenient measures.

The United States has been proud to stand with the people of the Republic of Korea as they confronted oppression, solidified their democracy, and became part of the vibrant Asian economy. Even after independence is gained, it must be carefully guarded. Brave citizens must be willing to sacrifice their lives in order to protect liberty. Just as both of our nations have struggled to survive after the initial moment of independence was earned, we must continue to foster the causes of freedom and democracy.

Again, I congratulate the Korean people on this historic celebration. This anniversary is a time to remember the sacrifices of the past, to take pride in your nation, and to look ahead to a future of promise.

I thank the gentleman for yielding the time.

Mr. Speaker, today the United States Congress will stand up for the people of Israel by sending a message to the terrorists and also to those countries that aid them. Rocket attacks and intentional violence against innocent civilians will not be tolerated. Israeli communities like Sderot and Ashkelon have sustained terrible, egregious damage, and the citizens have suffered from serious injuries, even fatalities. I should point out that oftentimes Palestinians as well, those who do not support the violence, are also victims of the crossfire. It is time that this brutality come to an end for all people.

Passing this resolution today truly is just a stepping stone to help end those egregious, aggressive acts of Palestinian terrorists and ensuring that innocent civilians in Israel can live together and live peacefully. It is violent Palestinian groups and terrorist organizations that must be held accountable for their horrific acts. Organizations such as Hamas, the Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committee, the PRC, need to understand that when they attack the people of Israel, the United States and other countries and the U.S. House of Representatives will not remain silent. Unjust actions like this must not go unpunished.

Today, we have a gentleman from one of those communities, Sderot, with us here in the House, in the House galleries. If he was here on the floor with us, he could share with us the life-and-death circumstances that he and his family and his neighbors and his community experience on a day-to-day basis.

As we are here on the floor of this House, in the safety of this city and of this community and of this country, we have to think about the men and women, think about the children who are back there right now, the children who, for all we may know, are in their safe rooms cowering, wondering when the next attack may be coming.

Many of those members of the community have already made the decision that it is just unbearable to live under that threat, under the constant pressure of not knowing when the next attack, when the next missile strike will come. And upwards around 20 percent of the country or the community has left, fled the area to safer havens, wherever they may be.

If this was an incident occurring in our country, along the borders of the United States, would we sit idly by while our neighboring country or the terrorists within that were lobbing rockets into it, into our territory? I think not.

It is for that reason that it is so unfortunate that other portions of the world community, parts of the U.N., have condemned Israel for taking defensive measures such as they have here.

I come to the floor today with my colleagues as well from both sides of the aisle and I appreciate the bipartisan support, to say, who will condemn the attackers?

Well, Mr. Speaker, I will. We will. This House of Representatives will, and this country will. Rest assured that I will continue to ensure that the Islamic radicals are held responsible for launching these vicious attacks, and also that countries like Iran, Egypt and Syria, which support terrorists and allow this activity to continue, should be held accountable as well.

I will join with my colleagues from both sides of the aisle to continue this fight until the global community joins in with the U.S. in condemning terrorism and its violent acts.

I thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee for yielding, and I also very much thank her for organizing this Special Order, to be able to have the opportunity to come to the floor tonight.

As we have said, the bottom line up front, how much we take in and how much we spend. The American public must sit home and watch this and read the papers and live in a frustrated state, realizing that so much of their hard-earned money comes to Washington, and what we have here is a Byzantine system of archaic rules and what-have-you wrapped around policy statements, what-have-you, that the American public doesn't oftentimes get a clear picture to understand just where their dollars go.

And that's what the purpose is here tonight and in subsequent weeks I believe as well, to try to remove that shroud of mystery behind the system that we have here, to shine the light of day, as we are oftentimes saying, on the budgetary process, to give the American public a clear picture of exactly where their dollars go to. And we do this with not just an educational point in mind or a goal but to also allow the American public and the voter and the taxpayer to be in a better posture to decide among themselves just where they want their Government to go in this election and future elections and of course over their lifetime as well.

It was just this past week when we were back at home in the district work period and I was able to sit at my dining room table. Around this time of year, April 15 is coming up, tax time, and my wife said now is the time to start getting the paperwork out, Scott, and begin to look at it and getting all the stuff you need to send to the accountant to do our taxes, because I had given up, quite candidly, years ago trying to figure out myself, as I imagine most Members of Congress have, to try to figure out the Byzantine Tax Code that we have created for the American public as well.

So I began the process of collecting all my documents. And, of course, some of those are some of the basic ones, like your W-2 to show you how much you've earned over the last 12 months, over the last year. And then there's one of those little boxes, I think box 8 or 9 on there, that also begins to show you just how much money has been taken out of your paycheck week after week. You don't see it so much, especially nowadays because so many people have direct deposit and it goes right into their checking account or bank account. You don't see how much is actually taken out.

But at the end of the year you sure do. At the end of the year you get that W-2 and you look at that box, and I say, oh, my gosh, that's how much

money. In payroll taxes and income taxes, you put them out all together, and it's in the five digits for a lot of middle-class Americans.

I come from the great State of New Jersey where middle-class America lives and works hard to make a paycheck and pay their bills. They would be astounded if they looked at their W-2s, as I did and maybe you should as well, to see how much taxes are taken out and sent down here to Washington.

The Government took in $21,992, almost $22,000, in household taxes. Now, mind you, those $22,000 are all household taxes. I believe that also includes payroll taxes alike. So your income taxes and payroll taxes, $22,000. The government spends $24,000 per household. So that's very easy math, and it's basically telling us that we are engaged in deficit spending. But look at that number: $22,000 taken out of the average middle-class American's paycheck.

When the average household income in some parts of the country is around 40-some-odd-thousand dollars, half of that money, figuratively speaking, is going in taxes. I know it doesn't come out of that tax rate for that particular family, but that's enough for some Americans to live on entirely in certain parts of this country with a little bit of assistance on the side. And that's how much is being paid per household in U.S. taxes.

For some of us, we think that's just too much. The numbers have been projected with a little bit of varying degree of certainty on this, but on average the American household, the American family, a middle-class American works starting on January 1, just a month or so ago, and works all the way to sometime in mid-May just to pay their Federal taxes, State and local taxes as well. And then if you want to add onto that all the burden and the costs of all the Federal regulations and everything that also is a burden on us as well, you have to work almost all the way until sometime in the summertime, the beginning of July. So think about that. You're working almost the entire half of the year just to pay your taxes and the burden of the Federal, State, and local Governments.

And where do those dollars go? Well, that's something that we're talking about here. On average, first of all, the burden falls around 18.3 percent of GDP. What does that mean? The historical average of all the revenue coming into the Federal Government from the 1960s all the way up until the present time varies up and down, some years more, some years less. But on average as a percentage of GDP, it's around 18.3 percent.

Now, what this means is that at certain times the tax rates and the burden on the American family is greater than others; sometimes it's less than others. But we're here to point out where those dollars go and what can we do to make sure that that tax burden does not continue to creep up higher and higher and higher so that the American family sees even more of their tax dollars go to that level and to purposes that they can only fathom a guess at.

If you have listened to the debate on this floor in past times, you've heard talk about earmarks and waste, fraud, and abuse. Earmarks are part of the problem, but they are only a small, small percentage of where our tax dollars go. The gentleman who was just speaking before spoke a little bit about the entitlements, Medicare and Medicaid, a much larger percentage. Let me fall someplace in between. As I sat there at my dining room table looking at the double-digit numbers as far as what my family has to pay in Federal taxes, I realize, as most Americans do, that we have an obligation to pay taxes into our Federal Government to provide for such things as national defense and homeland security, and we don't begrudge the Federal Government for any of those things. But as I also sat back, being a Member of Congress, knowing about the waste, fraud, and abuse and the unnecessary expenditures, that's when I and middle-class America begin to be concerned.

For example, nobody has to think back too far about all the dollars that we spent mistakenly in the area of Hurricane Katrina and the waste in portions of that spending. I had folks sitting in my office who did independent investigations on Katrina to see where those dollars were going to. Granted, there was a lot of necessary cost down there. But the waste, fraud, and abuse down there is telling. Fraud related to Hurricane Katrina spending is estimated to top $2 billion. One of the areas that the investigators who spoke to me were talking about was the debit cards, debit cards that were issued repeatedly to the same people. That means over and over again, even though they should have applied and qualified for one, in some cases debit cards and checks were being sent out to people regardless of need. In other cases, cards being sent out to people even though they did not live in the area, to be used for all sorts of things, from a Caribbean vacation to NFL tickets and so on and so forth.

Likewise, auditors discovered that 900,000 of the 2.5 million recipients of emergency Katrina assistance provided false or duplicate names, addresses, and Social Security numbers. And the interesting thing there, and I will make this last point on Katrina, is that even though the fraud investigators found out about this and they told FEMA about it, FEMA continued to issue those cards.

The other side of the aisle sometimes makes the case with regard to corporate welfare, and I agree with them. The Federal Government spends too much of wasteful money with regard to corporate welfare as well. According to some statistics, Washington spends $60 billion annually on corporate welfare versus $43 billion on homeland security. So note that we are spending more money on corporate welfare to some of the largest corporations in this country and the world than we are on homeland security. Likewise on corporate welfare, the Advanced Technology Program, which sounds like an admirable program, spends $150 million annually subsidizing private businesses, and 40 percent of that money goes to Fortune 500 companies.

So as middle-class America sits at home saying, where are my tax dollars going, that's some of the places where it's going.

I will yield back and maybe speak again in a moment on some other points. But let me just close on this: I have the honor and privilege of serving on the Budget Committee, the committee in which we have the opportunity to sit back and look at the entire Federal budget, the big picture overview, and I have had the opportunity to do this now for 5 years. And during that time, many of these examples come before us; and during that time we have, let's call it, partisan differences from the other side of the aisle and ours on what we should be doing about it.

But mind you, in the 5 years that I have served on this committee, the 5 years that I have served in this House, not one time do I recall anyone from the other side of the aisle suggesting that the solution to taking the burden off middle-class America is to reduce their tax rate and to do so by actually reducing tax expenditures. On the contrary, everything I have seen over the past 5 years, and as has been pointed out by the gentleman from California right now, has been in the opposite direction, an increase in Federal spending and, as we have seen now with the mother of all tax increases, an increase of the tax burden on middle-class America as well.

Those are the points that I believe the American public has got to understand. As they pay their taxes April 15, where are their tax dollars going? It's going to, if the other side has its way, increased Federal spending on programs like these and other programs as well and an increased burden on middle-class America, things that those on this side of the aisle vehemently oppose and are doing our best to rein in.

Madam Speaker, I rise today in honor of the 100th anniversary of Westwood United Methodist Church and to pay tribute to the legacy of community service that has marked that parish since its inception.

On February 10, 1908, twenty people first organized the parish as the First Methodist Episcopal Church of Westwood. The first services were held almost two weeks later in Odd Fellows Hall in Westwood. As the church grew, a sanctuary and parish building were built. The original sanctuary, which is now a part of the education wing, was built in 1913. The sanctuary now in use was dedicated in 1960.

Community service has always been a cornerstone of Westwood United Methodist Church's mission. Longtime member Ada Hampton helped to organize the Westwood Area Clergy Council and Westwood United Methodist Church has been an active participant since its inception. The parish worked with other community congregations to establish the Westwood House for Senior Citizens. They established the Family Food Cupboard and actively support the Helping Hand Food Pantry in Hillsdale, including through their September Food Drive. The Church regularly opens its doors to area self-help groups, like Alcoholics Anonymous. Gamblers Anonymous, and Alanon. And the Church has offered its facilities to the community as a crisis center in the event of a catastrophic emergency.

The Church has recently opened up a not-for-profit thrift shop to support charitable work. Westwood United Methodist Church has also been a longstanding, strong supporter of scouting, having been home to Troop 47 for over 80 years. The Twin Valleys District of the Northern New Jersey Council often looks to the Church for a meeting and event location. During the holidays. Westwood United Methodist works with the Bergen County Division of Youth and Family Services to brighten Christmas for less fortunate children through Operation Santa Claus. They work with the Inter-Religious Fellowship to provide meals for the homeless as well.

This parish provides a tremendous public service beyond its own church community and I commend them for their good works as they rededicate themselves to another century of service.

Madam Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the SINAI Schools, which provide a fulfilling environment for meeting the unique educational needs of children and young adults with learning and developmental disabilities.

Since 1982, the SINAI Schools have provided both Judaic and secular studies for individuals with a wide variety of special needs. Their elementary schools, high schools, and adult programs have earned praise from local leaders, parents, educators, and students alike. They are the only Jewish day school accredited by the Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools. The SINAI Schools tend to more than just the education of their students, they also care for their psychological and emotional well-being.

SINAI Schools depends on a tremendous cadre of active community leaders to maintain the unparalleled excellence of their programs. This weekend, at their annual benefit dinner, they will honor eight of these supporters who have dedicated so much of their time and energy to ensuring that all people receive the quality education that they deserve: Moshe and Arianne Weinberger, Teaneck, New Jersey; Mendy and Nomi Schwartz, Teaneck, New Jersey; Jason and Chani Teigman, Englewood, New Jersey; and Peter and Carol Weissman, Fair Lawn, New Jersey.

All of these individuals have demonstrated not only a strong commitment to education, but as active participants in their congregations and community groups like their local little leagues and volunteer ambulance corps they have also demonstrated real dedication to their heritage and their community as well. Such commitment is the backbone of our society, and I join the families of the SINAI Schools in commending these individuals this weekend.