Floor Statements

I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding me the time.

Madam Speaker, every single day Americans are asking, Where are the jobs? The answer is simple. Current regulations are destroying jobs. Last year alone, government regulations cost businesses more than $1.7 trillion.

As an example, this chart illustrates the significant burden that the Clean Air Act imposes on pulp and paper businesses in my district. These are all the regulations that could impact the industry in the next 10 years, with a price tag of 17 billion job-killing dollars, $17 billion.

Another example, the FDA has threatened General Mills with regulating Cheerios. Cheerios. Why? Because they don't like the health claim benefits on the box.

If we want to create more jobs in America, let's get the government out of the way, and we can start with the 157,000 pages of regulations.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Speaker, as a business owner who's only been in Congress for 19 days, I know as a small business owner that if we want more jobs in our economy, we must be serious about spending cuts.

Deficit spending in Washington is burdening future generations. Unborn Americans will have to pay for the benefits that we ascribe to ourselves. During the previous 2 years, Congress has added nearly $3.3 trillion to the national debt. Is it any wonder then that during the same time period our unemployment rate has skyrocketed from 7.8 percent to 9.4 percent? It's not.

As a small business owner, when I don't have to pay higher taxes, I'm able to hire more people. When I don't have to pay higher taxes, I'm able to invest in more equipment and more services.

Every dollar taken from me by the government means that I have to go out and earn $2 more just to break even. That's why I offered the amendment in the Rules Committee for spending even less, even less than the 2008 levels. 2008 levels are just a start. And we need to go much deeper than that. I support this rule.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Question for you: Is it the first time since 1974 that the House has operated without a budget?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

When you think about the repeal of the national health care bill, is that not a savings of $2.7 trillion, at least the elimination of a $2.7 trillion hole or an abyss on an entitlement program? Does it not reduce the debt by $700 billion? Are these not real numbers? And if we really wanted a number, if we were looking for the number, would they not have passed a budget last year?

Mr. Speaker, this health care bill is a job-destroying bill.

Shifting who pays simply does not reduce the cost of health insurance. As a matter of fact, when you look at it, the CMS says over the next 10 years we will see an increase of $311 billion in the cost of health care. This is $2.3 trillion of new taxes on Americans.

The deficit: Over the first decade, over $500 billion of new deficit spending; $1.5 trillion in the second decade.

Massive bureaucracy: 68 new programs, 47 new bureaucratic entities, and 29 pilot programs as a part of this bill.

It destroys the relationship, the intimate relationship between a patient and a physician.

The NFIB, the National Federation of Independent Business, says that over the next 10 years we will lose 1.6 million jobs in America because of this bill. By destroying the bill that destroys jobs, we've made progress.

Finally, we already have a $76 trillion hole in unfunded entitlements. By increasing the number of entitlements, we've simply increased the hole, another $2.7 trillion expansion in entitlement spending. The 10 years' revenue simply does not pay for the 6 years of benefits.

Madam Speaker, Mr. Chairman, I will say that it's truly an honor to serve on the Rules Committee. My first experience was a 12-hour experience last night and all day yesterday. What a wonderful opportunity to serve the American people.

This is a great opportunity for all of us in America to kill the jobs-killing health care bill that is taking jobs away from the private sector. I simply want to make six quick points.

The first point is that we all recognize that the cost of insurance is only going up, up and up. There is a misnomer that this bill somehow reduces the cost of insurance. It is simply categorically not true. Shifting who pays for the insurance, the health care cost, does not make the health care cost go down; it is simply going to continue to rise.

Second point, when you design a bill that has tax increase after tax increase after tax increase and say that you are reducing the deficit by increasing taxes, it is inconsistent with the reality that the American people want from their Congress.

Third, the individual mandate is simply unconstitutional. And if the individual mandate is not a part of the bill, if we don't force every single American to buy insurance, this Ponzi scheme simply doesn't work.

Number four, bringing 10 years of revenue in and paying out 6 years of benefit and calling that equal, that's a farce.

Number five, the lifetime benefits, challenging the lifetime benefits. We want everyone in America to have the access to health care without any question. The question we ask ourselves is, from an actuarial perspective, can we pay for it, a $2.7 trillion expansion, a new entitlement when we have a $76 trillion unfunded liability on the currents entitlement?

We simply cannot continue to dig a hole and call ourselves compassionate. There is nothing compassionate about increasing our entitlements by jeopardizing the future entitlements of all Americans.

Finally, the seventh point, we've heard lots of rhetoric about what we're doing to senior citizens and women. What we are facing is an opportunity to stop robbing future generations, to stop the unnecessary impact, the intergenerational cost. Without even taking into consideration the intergenerational costs, we consistently impact unborn Americans with legislation that passed under the former House.

It is good to be in the House with a brand-new Speaker. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to be a part of the Rules Committee.

On the campaign trail for the last several months we've heard two things from people. We've heard: cut spending, cut spending, cut spending. And the other thing we heard consistently was: live by the decisions that you make in Congress.

Well, today we have a great opportunity before us. We have an opportunity to do both--to start cutting spending--$35 million-plus in spending cuts--starting with us. It means that we start first and foremost by living with the decisions that we make. A 5-percent deduction in our MRAs gives us an opportunity to not spend the money so that other folks in families and small businesses have an opportunity when not paying taxes to invest more money in the future of their country and their families.

Second, as we consistently live under our own decisions, we tell the American people that we are simply ``listening.'' I heard constantly that the American people want a Congress that listens; that hears what they're saying; that understands their pain and then does something about it. The first step in that direction is for us to start living within our own means and to tell the American people that we hear them.

If we want to restore the confidence of the American people in their elected officials, we must start by doing things like this--cutting ourselves first and asking the rest of the government to follow.