Floor Statements

I thank Chairman Ryan for his distinguished leadership in bringing this budget to the floor. I rise in high support of it. I also am very proud. It's one of the highest honors I have had in my short time here to serve on this committee, not because of chairman Ryan only, but because of the members. By members, I mean Republican members and Democrat members. I note for the Record that Mr. Levin is not a member of the Budget Committee. But there are great people who are. That's why it's perhaps because of some of that pride that I'm disappointed to hear the ranking member characterize the accomplishment--because that's what it is--the accomplishment of balancing within 10 years as some sort of political goal.

Families who are trying to put food on the table, neighborhood associations, nonprofits, and for-profit businesses, for that matter, that have to make a budget balance every day, every month, ever year, I think should be offended by that characterization. It's not a political goal.

You know what's political, Mr. Chair? It's never balancing. You know what's political is the immoral idea that we are going to put more on our plate now, add up deficit after deficit, create a bigger and bigger debt, and then make people who don't even exist yet pay for it. Why is that political? Because, Mr. Chair, the people in the here and now can vote. Generations in the future, our grandkids who don't yet

exist, can't vote. And that's what makes the other approaches we've heard about immoral, wrong, political. We balance. We balance within 10 years.

Now let's contrast that a bit--our responsible approach--to what the Senate Democrats have done, for example. Next year alone, the Senate Democrats' budget increases spending by $162 billion above what we're spending today. Over 10 years it increases our debt by $7.3 trillion from today's levels, despite a massive tax hike that they have. And that tax hike adds $1.5 trillion in new taxes. So even after that, they still add to the debt--our kids' debt, our grandkids' debt--by $7.3 trillion.

Again, Mr. Chair, it never balances. After 4 years and $6 trillion in debt since a budget was even last passed, the Senate Democrats' vague proposal leaves America with even more debt and government that never stops growing. Amazingly, after 4 years, the Democrats were unable to identify any real reforms--no tax reform and no entitlement reform. It's simply not a serious proposal.

I stand, again, in support of the House budget because it's responsible, it's real, it balances in 10 years, and it's the last thing from political.

Madam Chair, I thank Chairman Kline and Representative Foxx for their work and their leadership on this bill.

The Workforce Investment Act is long overdue for reauthorization, especially given the monumental changes to our economy over the past 10 years since the law was last authorized. There are many important reasons to do so, including cutting waste and improving efficiency, but the most important reason to me is the moral one. Quite simply, the existing maze of Federal workforce training programs is failing those whom it is intended to be serving. By trying to be all things to all people, the Federal workforce training program is serving no one well, and that's a problem.

The Federal Government's footprint has gotten far too large, and our national debt has grown with it. As a result, it is failing to serve the workforce of today, and it's piling up ever-larger bills for the children of tomorrow, people who don't even exist yet.

What the SKILLS Act does is to consolidate and eliminate many unnecessary and duplicative programs, not simply for the sake of downsizing, but to improve the quality of the workforce training, and that's what we all should be about, Republicans and Democrats alike.

Business owners understand this. They understand the importance of streamlining and efficiency. They also understand the importance of getting a good return on their investment, and we aren't getting that right now. We have to make sure that the Federal Government abides by those same principles. In addition to consolidating existing programs, which the SKILLS Act does, it's important for us to make sure that we are actually recovering savings and reducing the deficit as well. We can do both things at once, my friends.

I'm thankful for the opportunity to work with Ms. Foxx and the chairman to include an important provision that will take the next step and reduce the amount of employees at the Department of Labor in line with reducing the programs.

The bill gives the director of OMB 60 days to identify how many full- time equivalent employees work on or administer programs that have been eliminated or consolidated. The director would then have a year to reduce the Federal Government's workforce by that same number.

Jobs that have the most value are jobs in the private sector, the productive sector, and to the extent we need jobs in the public sector, they should be to truly support and grow the private sector in a responsible way.

Quite simply, if the programs no longer exist, then there is no reason for extra Federal Government bureaucrats. While many of these Federal employees are not doubt very committed to their work, it is immoral for us to borrow more money from our children and grandchildren to pay for unnecessary expenses today. The Department of Labor may exist to serve our workforce, but it is not supposed to be a jobs program in and of itself. The legislation before us is a strong step in the right direction and will not only shrink the Federal Government and reduce our debt, but will ensure that we are delivering better results for America's workforce. By actually reducing the Federal Government's employment rolls, we will be restoring more local control. And, perhaps more importantly, will be making smarter use of America's tax dollars. So I encourage my colleagues to support this legislation for that, and also the common performance measures that are included in this.

One of my constituents, a small business owner, Jim Cramp, serves on one of the workforce investment boards.

He says that these common performance measures are absolutely critical. Even the simple difference of committing someone to a job for, and measuring their performance in that job, from 6 months to a year makes all the difference in how we really gauge whether or not these programs are successful and whether or not our economy is really growing.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of this important legislation offered by my good friend from Indiana.

For more than 2 years now, my colleagues and I have led a family discussion across this country about our debt and deficits. Our current national debt stands at over $16.5 trillion and increases by $4 billion per day. We have $100 trillion, Mr. Speaker, in unfunded promises coming down the pike.

What many Americans, including some Members of this distinguished body, fail to understand is that these numbers have consequences. Our debt and deficits are not simply a series of numbers. They are a reflection of our morality as a people. And what our debt and deficits reveal is that, for the first time in the history of our country, this generation is preparing to leave the next worse off.

I always seem to be able to talk about, at least on one side of this body, how many times something was introduced last year versus this year, and somehow expecting a difference. Einstein had something to say about repeating something and expecting a different result.

Would anyone in this room be able to stand here and argue that this choice, leaving the next generation worse off, is morally correct? Of course not. The out-of-control spending coming from Washington will have a devastating impact on future generations, our children and grandchildren.

I recently received a letter from a Boy Scout in my district by the name of Michael Krane, who said he is ``concerned and disappointed in the job Congress has been doing in the handling of the budget.'' Unfortunately, Michael does not have a voice in this conversation. He is too young to vote. And, of course, his children that he will one day have have no voice, yet they will be paying this bill.

That is why I support Luke Messer's bill, to continue this conversation with the American people by simply saying, to those of us who are taxpayers, what we bear in terms of the cost for the government that we now have, as inefficient and ineffective as it is.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and salute a remarkable Hoosier, Dr. Andrew Fischer, whom turns 50 years old today. I wish to express my congratulations on this milestone. He is a true leader in his community and the Hoosier state.

Dr. Fischer earned his medical doctorate from the Sackler School of Medicine at Tel Aviv University in 1989. After graduation, he interned at the Michael Reese Hospital and Med Center in Chicago, Illinois. Dr. Fischer completed his Residency in 1992 through the University of Illinois-Chicago at Michael Reese Hospital, and his Fellowship through Harvard Medical School at Bringham and Women's Hospital in Boston.

As a physician who specializes in critical care medicine, internal medicine, and pulmonology--Dr. Fischer is an asset to the Lafayette community and Franciscan St. Elizabeth Health Network. He is Board Certified in each discipline and licensed to practice in both Indiana and Illinois. As a Board Certified physician, Dr. Fischer is current on the latest techniques and skills for the procedures required in his discipline. Through his expertise, he has helped countless individuals recover from their various ailments.

Dr. Fischer is a family man and a good friend and confidant. I am honored to have known him over the years and proud to call him a friend. The Lafayette community and I look forward to many more years of extraordinary service and friendship.

This is Dr. Andrew Fischer. A man truly committed to God, his family, his country and his community. I value his friendship, counsel, and most of all, his good example. Happy 50th Birthday Dr. Fischer.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and salute a remarkable Hoosier, Theodore ``Ted'' W. Ogle. He was a true leader in his home of Columbus, Indiana. He left us way too soon.

Mr. Ogle served his community in many ways, including as a youth sports official and coach, as a board member of the Big Brothers and Big Sisters, and for 16 years on the Columbus City Council. Most recently, he served local Republicans as county and district chair. He was my dear friend.

I got to know Ted best when I first ran for office and needed his support. Ted said he was happy to see me but that his boys had a swim meet, and if I needed to see him, it was going to have to be there. So off I went to see him that day. To be honest, I probably learned more about swimming than politics.

As this Chamber knows, politics can be a tough business. There's always another meeting, another event, another obligation. It is all too easy to push our family life to the back burner. In his own quiet but direct way, Ted showed me where he set his priorities, and when it came time for me to have a wife and children, where I should set mine. I try to do that.

That was Ted Ogle--a man truly committed to God, his family, his country, and his party. I will miss his friendship, counsel, and most of all, his good example.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of the Red Tape Reduction and Small Business Job Creation Act. Time and again I hear from my constituents that they want to hire more workers, but they don't know what regulation is going to be coming down the pike next.

Congress does not spend enough time fulfilling its constitutional responsibility of overseeing the executive branch. This is why, a little more than a year ago, in partnership with the Indiana Chamber of Commerce, we started Indiana's Red Tape Rollback Program to listen to Hoosiers, take their regulatory concerns to Washington, and get results.

This, Mr. Speaker is our annual report. This is a page from that report, about 26 pages long.

Regulatory burdens are equal opportunity. They don't affect one industry or type of people. Regulatory burdens hurt agriculture, transportation, and even our home health care workers, who fear they won't be able to care for their clients. They hurt everybody.

I'm pleased that we have achieved a victory in 20 of our cases, and we will continue charging forward. I will continue to talk about the harm of overregulation and what it does to our economy. I will continue to advocate for a limited government, and I will continue to roll back the red tape.

You can get the report at rokita.house.gov.

I thank the chairman.

In my 18 months here, one thing has been clear and, that is, just like so many bills, this bill isn't just about the underlying subject.

What this bill is about is controlling the individual. What this bill is about is government oversight, government control, government decision-making by bureaucrats hundreds of miles away from us over something that should be between us and our doctor.

I do agree with the gentlewoman from Ohio, this bill, this law has already made a difference. The facts are clear. ObamaCare will add trillions of dollars in new taxes, increase our $16 trillion national debt by hundreds of billions of dollars, cause millions of Americans to lose their health insurance, destroy jobs, increase health premiums, impose new costs on States, and penalize American innovation. It's making a difference.

In Indiana--I also agree with the gentlewoman from Ohio--in Indiana, it shows just how harmful this law will be to the Hoosiers I represent. For people purchasing insurance in Indiana's individual market, premiums are expected to increase 75 to 95 percent from 2014 to 2020. Since passage of ObamaCare, my State has seen five insurance carriers withdraw from the individual market, resulting in less choice and less competition for Indiana consumers.

Indiana estimates that implementing and operating a federally mandated exchange would cost between $10.4 million and $18.3 million annually. Yes, Mr. Speaker, this law is making a difference--a bad difference.

As the House votes again to repeal President Obama's unpopular health care law, the American people must continue to make their voices heard. End of story.

Personal health care decisions should be made between individuals and their doctors.

ObamaCare passed more than 2 years ago. In the infamous words of the House leadership on the other side of the aisle at that time, we have now had a chance to see what's in it, and the fact remains: we do not like it.

I thank the gentleman.

Mr. Speaker, Indiana is a global leader in medical device innovation in the United States, providing tens of thousands of high-wage jobs to Hoosiers. There are over 300 medical device manufacturers in the State, many of them small businesses, all working on cutting-edge innovation.

Mr. Speaker, we need to preserve what is working in America. The medical device industry is working. In fact, it's helping to save manufacturing in this country, period. One of the biggest threats to the medical device industry is the tax punishing policies put forth by the last Congress and the President of the United States, commonly known as ObamaCare. It will send these manufacturing jobs to other countries so the cost of the tax can be made up.

In addition to sending jobs out of the country, this tax, if not repealed, will only drive up the cost of health care by shifting the costs onto consumers.

Medical device jobs provide an average of $60,000 in Indiana alone, which is 56 percent higher than the State average. The economic impact of Indiana's medical device industry eclipses $10 billion, and job growth has increased nearly 40 percent in the last few years. Similar numbers can be applied to the State and across this Nation.

Although the tax is not scheduled to take effect until next January, we are already feeling its choking boot on the necks of hardworking Americans and sick people. Indiana medical device companies have already laid off good Americans, thanks to this tax, which is just one more example of this failed Presidency.

The national unemployment rate increased again last month. We cannot afford to move forward with this ill-conceived tax on American innovation, on American companies who add value to this Nation and its economy.

I encourage all of my colleagues, Mr. Speaker, to vote ``yes'' on the rule and for final passage of H.R. 436.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend a publication that has played a central role in shaping the ideas that have powered the conservative movement for decades.

Launched in 1944, Human Events is the Nation's oldest conservative newsweekly. In 1961, a rising star by the name of Ronald Reagan began reading Human Events. He enjoyed it so much that throughout his Presidency he would receive the very first issue each week hot off the presses.

Back in 1992, I was honored to serve as an intern for Human Events, where I worked closely with political editor John Gizzi, whom I consider a good friend. This week, Human Events relaunched its print edition with a new format and expanded Washington coverage.

Conservatives have long depended upon Human Events to carry out its mission, which is to analyze events through the eyes that favor limited constitutional government, local self-government, free enterprise, and individual freedom. That is a mission I wholeheartedly support.

I commend Human Events to you, Mr. Speaker, and to this entire body.

I rise today to recognize an Indiana-born and bred entrepreneur who exemplifies innovation and dedication.

Charlotte Lucas, along with her husband, Forrest, founded Lucas Oil Products in 1989. Under her leadership, Lucas Oil quickly established itself as a top-selling additive line in the trucking and automotive retail industry.

To Indiana, Charlotte is still the good-natured Hoosier who always enjoys meeting new people and who knows the importance of being there for people in need. Marked by common sense and a commitment to philanthropic interests, her leadership embodies the qualities emblazoned in the Hoosier spirit itself.

There is a slogan at Lucas Oil, Mr. Speaker, that reads: ``It works.'' Well, I think the same can be said of Charlotte. Working on behalf of children, the elderly, race car drivers and their families, and many more other causes, she has provided so many with a better place to live, work, and raise a family. Whatever Charlotte does, it works.

As a man of faith, I believe we were put on this Earth to love one another and to make the best of the gifts the Lord has provided. When I look at Charlotte, her husband, Forrest, and how she shared her good fortune with our world, all I can say is, Amen. Charlotte Lucas exemplifies the American Dream in every way, and I am proud to honor her on her birthday in recognition of her devotion to her family, friends, employees, and our whole Hoosier community.

Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Budget Committee, I'm pleased to have not only helped author this budget but to stand here in strong support of it. It's a fair budget. It's an honest budget.

The gentleman from New Hampshire said this is the second year in a row that we are telling the truth to the American people. You know, the old adage was ``never touch that third rail of politics.'' Never touch Medicare, never touch Medicaid, never talk about Social Security. Touch it and you will die. We are debunking that myth because that's exactly what it is.

We give credit to the American people by telling them the truth. We have that respect for them. Sixty-five percent of our spending year over year comes out of this House on programs that don't work well and that are bankrupt. They won't be around for our children, and that's these programs right here.

This is what drives our debt: 65 percent of our current spending.

You know what's unfair? It's unfair that in a few decades these programs, as this chart shows, will take 100 percent, will take up all of the revenue that we bring in, the taxes that we bring in as a Federal Government.

Now, some will say, Hey, wait a minute, I paid into those programs; I deserve to take out. Well, that's kind of true as well.

Let's take Medicare for example. On average, we pay in 30 percent of what we're going to take out; and that 70 percent difference comes from the children of tomorrow who don't exist yet, who have no voice in this debate.

It's unfair that no one speaks for them. We do.

We speak for the people in the here and now, and we speak for the people of tomorrow. Immigrants didn't come to this country for wealth redistribution. They didn't come to this country to practice intergenerational theft. They want their kids and they want their grandchildren to have a better life than they did. Our budget does that.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and salute an exceptional Hoosier, Jerry W. Throgmartin. Sadly we lost Mr. Throgmartin on January 22. I wish to express my condolences, thoughts and prayers to his family. He was a true model of the entrepreneurial spirit.

As a man of faith, I believe we were put on this earth to love one another and to make the best of the gifts our Lord has provided. We are all blessed to live in a country that allows us to experience freedom, the opportunity to learn, and the ability to succeed. As a Hoosier businessman, Mr. Throgmartin devoted his career to growing the appliance and electronics store founded by his grandfather, Henry Harold Gregg in 1955. Starting with the company in 1975 as a salesman, he worked his way up, succeeding his father, Gerald, as president in 1989. As Chairman and CEO from 2003 to 2009, under his leadership, the company grew rapidly through acquisitions and new store openings. HHgregg expanded to over 200 stores employing hundreds of Americans.

A graduate of the University of Indianapolis, Mr. Throgmartin also served as Chairman of the Board of Trustees. He earned his MBA at Indiana University where he was Chairman of the Indiana University Simon Cancer Center Development Board. His involvement with the Center had personal meaning, as he overcame lymphoma in the early 1980s. He was a regular contributor and adviser to the Shepherd Community Center on the Eastside of Indianapolis. The Executive Director of the Community Center called Mr. Throgmartin a person who weaved his faith, family and career into a beautiful tapestry.

Jerry was the embodiment of the American spirit and I would like to thank his family for sharing him with our Hoosier community.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and honor an incredible seventh generation Hoosier, Randall T. Shepard, upon his retirement as Chief Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court.

Chief Justice Shepard's leadership skills were tested and noticed early in his life when he received his Eagle Scout designation. He received his under-graduate degree from Princeton University in 1969; his Law degree from Yale Law School in 1972; and his Masters of Law degree from the University of Virginia School of Law in 1995. He served as Vanderburgh County Superior Court Judge from 1980 1985. He was appointed by Governor Robert D. Orr as the 99th Justice of the Indiana Supreme Court on September 6, 1985. In March of 1987 Justice Shepard became the youngest State Chief Justice and has served in that capacity since, making him the longest serving Chief Justice in the country.

His love for the Judiciary, coupled with his incredible intellect and quiet thoughtful demeanor, Justice Shepard has forever left his stamp on the Indiana Supreme Court. ``C J'', as he is affectionately called on the third floor of the Indiana Statehouse, has opened those imposing doors to television cameras and webcasts during arguments. He also directed changes that led to fewer criminal appeals and more civil cases being heard by the Supreme Court. He stated he is most proud that during his years on the bench Indiana has better court-related programs for children and domestic violence victims; increased professional development for judges; and a wider range of sentencing options.

Indiana has not been able to keep Justice Shepard solely to itself. He is recognized as a national authority on judicial ethics and legal professionalism. In 2006, U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice and fellow Hoosier, John Roberts, appointed him to the U.S. Judicial Conference Advisory Committee of Civil Rules. In 2009, Justice Shepard was the recipient of the national Dwight D. Opperman Award for Judicial Excellence. As a Justice, Mr. Shepard has authored more than 850 majority opinions and has published more than 40 Law Review articles.

All Hoosiers must now, reluctantly, give ``C J'' back to his wife, Amy McDonnell, and their daughter, Martha. We do so knowing that the state of the Judiciary in Indiana has been led by the best of the best these last twenty-five years. We wish him relaxing days with more time to spend on his love of historic preservation and God's richest blessings in his retirement. He will be greatly missed.

I thank the gentlewoman from North Carolina for yielding me the time, and not just for the time but for her continued leadership on the floor of this House and in the Halls of Congress. It is steady, it is dignified, it is common sense, and it is certainly a great reflection of the people she represents.

I rise this afternoon to give my strong support to this measure.

During this time of economic uncertainty and high unemployment, it is more important than ever to make sure the Federal Government does not stand in the way of Americans who wish to continue their education and gain the skills necessary for a more prosperous future. It's pretty simple. I believe a strong higher education system is critical to preparing American graduates for an increasingly competitive workforce.

In Indiana, my students are not just competing with other students in Fort Wayne and Evansville. They are competing with students from places all over the world whose names we can barely pronounce. That requires a different strategy. However, the regulatory initiatives put forth by the Department of Education will only add strain and undue burden on our colleges and universities.

One of these regulations pertains to the authorization that a college or university must obtain from a State when operating within that State. For institutions providing online education programs, which is becoming the new norm, this regulation could require them to obtain authorization in every State where enrolled students reside in order to participate in the Federal student aid programs. This regulation will only serve to negatively impact States and institutions of higher education across the country and inject the Federal Government once again into an issue that is best left to the States and the postsecondary institutions themselves.

I heard from many outstanding institutions in Indiana on this regulatory change. They are facing hundreds and potentially thousands of additional administrative hours just because they offer online programming. That is not fair. That is not American. Not only that, but if this rule goes into effect, they will likely deny entrance to students in States where they are not approved and deny financial aid to any current students living in those States, as well.

For all these reasons, I urge my colleagues to adopt this measure.

Mr. Speaker, it is my great privilege as the representative of Indiana's Fourth District to rise and pay tribute to Mr. Dan Terrell, Mayor of Mitchell, Indiana.

Mayor Terrell is a man of deep civic conviction, a loving father of 6, and a devoted grandfather of 17.

Dan Terrell was born in Mitchell, Indiana, and has remained there his entire life. He has never lost the small town conservative spirit that growing up in the Heartland of America gave him.

Following his retirement from the Canadian Pacific Railroad, Dan Terrell was ready to concentrate fully on helping his hometown overcome challenges that so many small cities and towns have faced: lost businesses, sidewalks that were unsafe or non-existent, infrastructure in total disrepair, drinking water barely able to pass State regulations. During Mayor Terrell's four years in office these, and many other concerns, have not only been addressed but have been corrected. That is leadership.

Besides the tangible accomplishments, his representation of the City as he traveled throughout Indiana offered his constituents a Mayor they could be proud of. A great example of this is the fact that he chaired the Southern Indiana Mayors Roundtable, a convention of all the mayors in Indiana.

His leadership and vision will be truly missed as he leaves the Mayor's office. His love and his devotion for his hometown will continue. Mr. Speaker, it has been a true honor to stand in tribute and offer my thanks to the civic service of Mayor Dan Terrell, one of Indiana's best mayors and my close friend.