Floor Statements

Madam Speaker, I rise today to remind my colleagues why we are here.

We are here to represent our constituents, and we are bound by an oath that we all took when we were sworn into office.

As each of us stood in this Chamber, we solemnly swore that we would support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that we would bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that we would take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that we would well and faithfully discharge the duties of this office in which we serve, so help us God.

Madam Speaker, there is a constituent of mine, Jack Smith. He is a defender of the Constitution and one of the strongest conservatives I know. Jack never fails to sound the alarm when Washington is off track when it comes to the Constitution--and I think we all know that comes quite often; it is very frequent.

So whether it's a foreign or domestic enemy of the Constitution, I stand committed to defend this document whenever and wherever I can. And today, in honor of Jack and the Ninth Congressional District, Liberty Council, and all my constituents, I urge the Members of this House, the Senate, and the Office of the President to reflect on your oath, to reflect on what you swore as you took that oath of office and the clear guidelines that it and the Constitution have bound us by, because the future of this great and glorious cause we call America depends on it.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Gainesville, Georgia, for earning a spot in the Top 100 ``Best Cities for Job Growth in 2011.''

This award is a testament to the small business owners and the entrepreneurs in Gainesville who work hard every day to innovate and to grow despite the pressures put on them from Washington and this challenging economic climate. To make the Top 100, the city of Gainesville was measured on recent growth as well as growth over the last 5 years.

Driving the success were the entrepreneurs who created 34 new businesses or grew existing ones. They collectively brought in 1,140 new jobs to Gainesville and nearly $250 million in capital investment. I'm proud to represent Gainesville in Congress and proud of the hard work of my neighbors in Georgia. Today, the city of Gainesville stands a little bit taller because of the hard work of the entrepreneurs in north Georgia.

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

Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield to the gentlelady from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx), who is an expert on this topic and whom I rely on. And I want to thank the gentlelady for her comments today.

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

Mr. Speaker, I just want to take the opportunity to address this because there is one issue facing this Nation right now that is far greater than what we're even discussing at this point and that is jobs and the lack of jobs in this Nation as a result of 2 failed years of an experiment that just didn't work.

Now, we can talk about spending all we want. We're going to talk about that, I know, for the next day or two and over the next couple of weeks. The American people just expect us to deal with cutting spending here in the Federal Government. They just sent us here and they said, Just take care of your job. Get it done. Spend within your means. Don't spend more than you get. And take care of your job. At the same time, understand what's happening back home on Main Street.

I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, as I go home each and every week and I see the devastation that's occurring all across all the communities in my district, it is amazing to see the ``For Sale'' signs and ``For Rent'' signs that just pop up each and every week that are anew because of a failed experiment that has occurred here.

So we heard the gentleman a minute ago say the Republicans have no plan. Let's talk about their plan and how effective it has been with, what, we've had 2 years now of at or above 9 percent unemployment, 15 million Americans looking for a job, deficit spending now going on $1 trillion for 3 consecutive years. And yet we are on the eve of the week here in which we're going to celebrate President Barack Obama's claim of the ``summer of recovery,'' the 1-year anniversary of that claim.

I want to tell you, Mr. Speaker, there has been no recovery as a result of the policies passed by this administration. We must take a different direction. It starts here by cutting spending. It starts by reducing the size of government. And the reason is very simple. Because the less the government has in its pocket, the less it's spending, there is more left for the American people. And when the American people have more money in their pockets, they have the ability to expand their businesses, they have the ability to dream an idea, have a great idea, go out and invest in that idea. They have the ability to hire new employees. They have the ability to invest in new capital.

But, instead, this Congress over the last couple of years has hoarded that wealth, kept it here in Washington, divvied it out to the winners that they choose just through their own pickings here. Who's going to get the money of the American people? They dole it out left and right. Yet today, when we're looking at giving it back to the American people, the other side stands against it once again.

Mr. Speaker, it's time to get Americans back to work. We don't do that through the expansion of the public sector. We do it through the expansion of the private sector. Let's empower the American people and take some power away from the Federal Government.

Madam Chair, I move to strike the last word.

I appreciate the gentleman from Utah bringing this forward. This is a time when we've got to be looking for every opportunity to be wise stewards of the taxpayers' dollars. And all we're asking here is $1.8 billion out of trillions of dollars of spending here in the Federal Government, $1.8 million more. I think the taxpayers understand that. They expect that.

I don't know that anyone here has criticized the use of these funds, where it is going. It's not that. It's just the fact that the money is not there. How can you continue spending money you do not have? I think back on the average American families at home. They have to make difficult decisions. There are a lot of things that the average family would like to do each and every week; but if they don't have the resources to do it, they wait until they can save up and do it at another appropriate time. They enjoy it at a later date when they have the ability to do that.

Madam Chair, right now we do not have that ability as a Federal Government. For far too long we've spent too much. It's not a partisan issue, necessarily. Both parties are responsible for the reckless spending that's gone on in Washington. But this is the day, this is the time that we can correct that course. We can correct the path. We don't have to continue down this same path that's been going on over and over and over again. The status quo is not acceptable.

In fact, the American people, they deserve better. We have an opportunity

right now to send a strong message to the American people that $1.8 billion is being sent back to the taxpayers. Just imagine that--taking money from the Federal Government that it's used to absorbing from the taxpayer and allowing the taxpayers to choose how they wish to spend it. What a great concept. How novel is that, to allow the taxpayers to choose how they invest their money, where they might spend it. Which leads to the number one issue facing this Nation--and it's jobs and the economy.

If we want to see the economy improve, if we want to see revenues here in Washington improve, it's not through tax increases. It's through the economy improving. It's through the GDP, the engine of this Nation moving once again. And how do we do that? We release the dollars we hold as a Federal Government and the additional dollars that we're borrowing from foreign countries and we allow the private sector to hold that, allow the private sector to make those investments, allow them to be the dreamers. Those that have the ideas, those that have the ideas, entrepreneurs, allow them to be the risk-takers, the job creators we know they are and they want to be.

Instead, we hear again opposition which says, no, we know better as the Federal Government. Let us keep that money. Let us take it from your wallet. Let us distribute it out as we know best. I think I heard a speaker earlier today say the Federal Government is better at making decisions than the American people. I mean we've heard that concept expressed here already, that we know better. Well, the fact is the American people know better how to spend their money.

So the gentleman from Utah brings up a great amendment that says $1.8 billion in additional cuts, saving the taxpayers once again additional money. That only adds to the savings that the chairman of the subcommittee has already fought for, and I'm happy to serve with him on the committee. He's done a fabulous job of taking us back to 2006 spending levels, an amazing effort on behalf of the subcommittee, and this just takes it back just a little bit further. Surely we can do that for the American people tonight in this House.

I yield back the balance of my time.

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

Mr. Chairman, I'm here today in opposition to this amendment, and I've heard a lot of the compelling arguments here today as to why this amendment should be adopted.

Well, first, let me remind the Members that the Appropriations Committee passed the language that's in this bill right now that restricts funding from going to projects that require

project labor agreements. That's all this does, and I think we should all be for it. We should all be for free markets. We should all be for capitalism, for the best contractor competing against the best contractor and putting up the best price for the project.

Now, they said that there were reports cited in The Wall Street Journal, and I just happen to have what The Wall Street Journal cited, and they did cite the independent study that was commissioned by the Department of Veterans Affairs that says in the study, the Obama project labor agreement would likely raise the VA construction costs for hospitals by as much as 9 percent in three of the five markets. So it's clear that there is a study by an independent organization there that says costs will go up.

Now, can we not accept that as evidence enough that we do not need project labor agreements as a mandate to receive the funding for projects throughout this Nation? I mean, we live in a day and a time in which the debt and deficit are out of control, and it seems to be what we spend our arguments about and our debates about is spending, and that's an important topic. But the number one issue facing this Nation right now is the economy and the job losses.

Mr. Harris, he was so eloquent as he was talking about unemployment, 9.1 percent now. We all know that. We're here on the celebration of the 1 year since the beginning of the summer of recovery, and yet we don't see any recovery.

These project labor agreement requirements by the executive order were placed in effect in 2009; and as Mr. Bishop referenced, you know, this was good for jobs, good for creating local jobs. Well, where are the jobs? They do not exist. In essence, we've had 2 years of a failed experiment, Mr. Chairman; and I think it's time to say, you know what, look, the experiment didn't work, let's put it up on the shelf, and let's try something new. Let's go back to what we know works and that's empowering the private sector, empowering the free markets, allow competition to thrive, allow costs to come down and the quality of goods to go up.

I have to tell you, Mr. Chairman, when I go home, it pains me to see the new ``For Sale'' signs that are up, the new ``For Rent'' signs that go up each and every time, and I'm sure we see it in each and every one of our districts as we go home. And oftentimes previously, 4 or 5 years ago, you might see a vacancy in a shop because they had moved out, because they had expanded their operations and they were moving up. But now it's just the opposite. We know that businesses are not moving out and expanding as much as they once did. Instead, they're shutting down and closing the doors and that ``For Rent'' or ``For Sale'' sign goes up.

It's time to reverse that back, and we know how to do that. It is so simple; it is so clear. Why it binds this Congress up, I have no idea, when our Nation was founded on such great principles as we have been founded on and yet over the years we feel like we can manipulate the marketplaces, just like the project labor agreement requirements are going to do as well.

Mr. Chairman, I say we defeat this amendment, and we think about that 1-year anniversary here of that summer of recovery declaration from last year. And I know there was a lot of hope that that summer of recovery would occur; but the one thing that is true, Mr. Chairman, is you cannot change the facts, and the facts are clear. Americans are ready to be empowered with new jobs and employment. The only way we can do that, though, is to empower the private sector, and let's get government out of the way to do it.

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

Mr. Chairman, I guess I'd start off by saying only in Washington can spending money lead to saving money. That's what we just heard. But that's not the case.

I think about what the impact that ObamaCare is having on the State of Georgia. This year alone hundreds of millions of dollars it's cost the taxpayers of Georgia, projected to be over $1 billion here in subsequent years.

While I support full repeal of the program, I've already demonstrated that through my votes, this is specifically getting rid of a slush fund that's in place eliminating funding for the construction of facilities in local communities.

I'm sure this is a laudable program in many areas, and there's probably a lot of laudable programs that folks want to fund. But the fact is we just can't do it. We don't have the resources to do it anymore.

Number one, we need to find out what is the true role and function of this Federal Government. I do not believe this is it. We should allow the States and empower the States who are best equipped to handle the needs of the local community.

So I certainly support this measure and urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on H.R. 1214, and let's move on to repealing the full measure of ObamaCare.

You know what's great about being here today and talking about the Ryan plan is it's a blueprint. And blueprints you can do a couple things to. You can add to, and you can take away from.

And what we've heard from the progressives a minute ago is, plunder the people's plan rips the pages out of the future of this Nation for our children and our grandchildren. But the Republican Study Committee, it adds to it. It actually takes it a step further. It saves the taxpayers more money by providing savings starting with 2006 levels and going to 2008 levels.

But what we have to recognize is the debt and the deficit problems we have here today are not because we are taxed too little; it's because we have spent too much. And it is a result of 2 failed years of more government, more taxes, and more spending that we've seen. It's time to put that in history. Let's put it in the drawer.

Let's move on, and let's pass the Republican Study Committee plan because I can assure you this: It doesn't go where the President and the liberals of this House want to go, and that's into the wallets of the taxpayers of this Nation.

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the chairman clarifying some things we just heard because I was at a loss thinking I was going to need much more than 3 minutes to rewrite some of what we just heard there and correct the historical account of the last several years.

We've heard the lamenting and wailing today from the other side of the aisle. It is amazing to hear about why we are here? Why are we in this position today?

We are hearing government shutdown from the Democrats. You're not hearing that from the Republicans. You're hearing no, we have to cut spending and reduce the size of government. But we hear we're at the brink, we're about to shut down government, and we have to wonder: Why are we here?

Well, the chairman brought it up so eloquently just a minute ago. When they were in the leadership last year, and it wasn't that long ago, 1 year ago, they had the opportunity. They had the opportunity to pass their own budget. They didn't do it.

So instead, they passed a CR. The CR went for 4 or 5 weeks. It wasn't enough. Let's do another one because again, they couldn't pass a budget. They passed another CR for 2 more weeks. Again, it wasn't quite enough. So let's go 3 days because we don't know now to pass a budget nor have an appropriations meeting. And then, yet again, let's pass another one for just over 2 months. That is why we are here today. That is why the Republicans are stepping up and leading. That is why the Republicans passed a CR a few weeks ago cutting a hundred billion dollars.

But yet again the Democrats, they do not want to step up and lead at this time in our Nation.

So here we are again, the chairman of appropriations and the Republicans have stepped up and said it is time to lead. So $2 billion a week in cuts, yes, that is what we are proposing. Should it be more? Sure it should be more.

To those who have said we were cutting the wrong programs, I assure you, you'll have your chance to cut those programs because, again, we will be cutting more.

So this measure, hopefully it will pass both Chambers, and we will avert the government shutdown. And the question is then: What happens next? The American people want to know that.

Well, I want the American people to know this: that there are more spending cuts on the way. Now, some of my colleagues on the other side will say, we don't need to cut spending. In fact, we have heard that. We've heard that they want to freeze spending instead, which is akin to tying a brick to the accelerator of this vehicle that is going off the cliff when we need to take our foot off that accelerator. Again, it is the status quo that we hear from the other side.

We heard a minute ago from the leader of the Democrats, the former Speaker, and her quote was: They took the lead in deficits.

Oh, is she so right. In fact, they have led 3 straight years of deficit spending, consecutive years, trillion-dollar deficits, and now a $14 trillion debt. What leadership that is.

The status quo is unacceptable. The American people deserve so much more. So today, let's stop that threat of a government shutdown, and let's save the taxpayers $4 billion. Let's come back and let's save them billions upon billions more. But let's get ready because deeper spending cuts are necessary. And as we saw from that Government Accountability report, duplicative programs exist.

Madam Speaker, it is time to eliminate some of those programs, continue eliminating portions of this government, and get this fiscal house back on track.

Madam Speaker, I have to take a moment here to, I guess, comment back on the distinguished whip's comments a minute ago.

It's great that he pointed out his knowledge of history and his years of experience here, and he's right about a few things. He talked about the years

of Bill Clinton and the spending cuts and the deficit reduction and debt reduction, all those kinds of things. He's absolutely right. But he didn't tell you the rest of the story, and that is the Republicans took the majority in 1995 and were part of that process, in leading through the legislative process not through the executive process.

And then he talked about George Bush and the 8 million job losses. And if you look back, if you look at the rest of the story on that again, that starts in about 2006 and 2007 and 2008. And if we think about who was in charge at the time, yes, it was the distinguished whip, who was the leader at the time, and the former Speaker. So they were right. They were right about history, but they weren't telling the whole story, and that is that the Republicans were leading during those difficult times and providing the spending cuts when necessary.

To the gentleman a minute ago who said government is not the solution, you're absolutely right. And to finish that quote from Ronald Reagan, more so, it is the problem.

I thank the gentleman.

You know, just listening to what we just heard from our colleague across the aisle, he said, Go back and talk to your doctors, talk to parents, talk to seniors.

You are missing the point. It's time to listen. That's what we've been doing. We've been listening. And the American people in November said it's time not only to defund this but to repeal this measure. Again, the House has moved forward to do so. Maybe you should quit talking to and start listening to.

Mr. Chairman, I'm here in support of this amendment because, simply put, it defunds ObamaCare bureaucrats. If this amendment is adopted, government bureaucrats cannot be paid so much as to lift a finger, move a paperclip, send an email if it has anything to do with ObamaCare.

Sir, I would rather just finish my comments here. They have plenty of time on their side.

And since today we're here to talk about saving the taxpayer dollars, let's remember the cost of ObamaCare.

So we are here today to talk about the taxpayers' money. Let's remember the cost of ObamaCare: $2.6 trillion over the first 10 years once it's implemented, $560 billion in new taxes on American families and businesses, unconstitutional mandates, higher premiums, and, yes, lost coverage.

The law is so damaging that the Obama administration themselves have granted at least 915 waivers for health plans and organizations.

Now, think about that savings--2.5 million people from ObamaCare.

Mr. Chairman, let's save the rest of America here today and let's support the Rehberg amendment and move on and zero out the payments to those ObamaCare bureaucrats.

Parliamentary Inquiry

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

Mr. Chairman, I'm here today in support of this amendment, and I want to thank those who have been working in this effort--Mrs. Emerson, Mr. Walden, Mr. Upton, and Mr. Diaz-Balart. I appreciate them letting me join in this debate.

As we've heard a lot of the conversation, it gets complicated sometimes when you have elected officials get up and start talking about broadband and Internet and FCC. Well, let's make it simple. Government control means uniformity, regulations, fees, inspections, and yes, compliance. Just think if those words had existed since the 1990s with the Internet. We wouldn't know one thing about ``broadband,'' let alone a ``tweet.'' The Internet's marketplace is defined by fierce competition, and that competition has transformed this world with innovation, investment, and what we need most of all right now--jobs. It's possible that the most intelligent and bipartisan policy that Washington has had thus far has been to leave the Internet virtually untouched by the Federal Government and regulators. And the result? Internet-based industries have flourished and employed a generation of Americans. So let's be clear today: there is no net neutrality crisis.

The speed and depth of the Internet as we know it today came from consumer choice and competition. Consumers have successfully picked those winners and losers, not government, and they've done it without the FCC's help. Imagine that. Consider the choices in rate plans, the various points of access, and demand for openness and accessibility. A service provider that restricts access would do so at their own peril and to the prosperity of their competitors.

So after all the life-changing innovation, the accidental billionaires, President Obama's revolutionary e-campaign, after all the groundbreaking technology that has defined this age of the Internet, we must ask that question, Why? Why would unelected bureaucrats at the FCC want to take over and feel good about this Internet takeover right now with their new rules and policies, keeping things neutral being their claim. Well, three words come to mind to me today, and that is: Trojan Horse virus.

So, Mr. Chairman, let's pass this amendment today and let's install some antivirus protection for Americans on the Internet.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I move to strike the last word.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for your attentiveness to this process. I know it is laborious.

I want to draw attention, I want to go back just a few steps here when we were listening to an amendment brought to us by my good friend from New York (Mr. Reed).

As we are going through this process, there are those who have been working extremely hard, the Appropriations Committee and Members all across this House, and Mr. Reed dug very deep and he found something I think all of us wanted to see, something that was exposed, that the American people pointed out clearly, that the Federal Government has been spending money where it does not need to be spending money.

Think about where we are as a nation: $14 trillion in debt; unemployment unacceptable; GDP dropping; $1.5 trillion of deficit, which is almost 150 percent of what the Federal Government takes in. Think about where we are. And then children, upon conception, you ask any economist, they will vary somewhere between $42,000 and $47,000 of debt inherited upon conception.

Yet Mr. Reed, he points out here today a great find: That this government is funding a Tijuana sewer rehabilitation project. There is something about that that just stinks. And I would hope that this House, that Americans all across this country, that Members of this House would see that just $10 million is being funded for a rehabilitation project of a sewer facility in Mexico, yet we are in this position of this fiscal house being out of order and in disorder.

I would hope that this House would see and recognize that this simple amendment, only $10 million, a small amount compared to that $1.5 trillion deficit, is worthy of a ``yes'' vote of amending this out of this CR, and we would send a message to the American people: It doesn't matter if it is $1, $10 million, $1 billion, if it is unnecessary funding coming from this government, we are going to get it out and get this fiscal house back in order.

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

Offered By Mr. Graves of Georgia

Amendment No. 25: At the end of the bill (before the short

title), insert the following:

Mr. Speaker, early reports indicate that President Obama will call for a new spending package during his State of the Union address tonight. Now, I have heard, as many of you have, that this might be masked, as he might say tonight, as targeted investments. More stimulus. Democrats speak for stimulus, but it will be hidden with calls for tepid spending cuts.

Well, Mr. Speaker, Americans know that our debt is $14 trillion. They know that the President spent $1.3 trillion over the budget last year, only to see unemployment stay above 9 percent. Now is the time to pivot to fiscal responsibility. It's time to shred the President's maxed-out credit cards and cut his weekly allowance. It's time to tell our kids and grandkids that we don't want them to bear the burden of our generation's fiscal irresponsibility.

Mr. Speaker, I, along with my constituents in north Georgia, hope that the early reports are wrong about another stimulus being proposed tonight. Rather than use a few spending cuts as window dressing for more spending, tonight is the President's opportunity to seize the moment, to be a leader, and get serious about spending reform.

Mr. Speaker, today is a historic day in America. Acting on the will of the voters and the majority of all Americans, today we will vote to repeal ObamaCare.

Now, while the Senate appears less interested in following suit, here in the House this vote marks the beginning of round two of a vigorous and spirited national debate on health care. Over the coming months and weeks, this debate will go from Congress to kitchen tables all across this country. So as we reengage in this debate, the party on the left questions: Why do the American people want this policy repealed so bad? So let's revisit some of those areas.

Number one, the employee mandate, penalizing and punishing businesses for not having government-approved health care; the individual mandate, punishing and taxing Americans who choose not to have government- approved health care; the $569 billion in new taxes on the American people; jobs being lost; the cost of the bill, $2.6 trillion with a $700 billion deficit over the first 10 years of its life; and, yes, 222 corporations already exempt and waived from this policy. That's why.

It's time to reopen the debate, debunk the myths, and replace this law with less costly, market-driven solutions that truly expand access and affordability, and above all, preserve our individual liberties.