Floor Statements

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and congratulate Jacob J. Pomeroy for the rank of an Eagle Scout. Travis is a 10th grade student from South Hardin High School in Eldora, Iowa.

The Eagle Scout rank is the highest advancement rank in scouting. Only about 5% of Boy Scouts earn the Eagle Scout Award. The award is a performance based achievement whose standards have been well-maintained over the years. To earn the Eagle Scout rank, a Boy Scout is obligated to pass specific tests that are organized by requirements and merit badges, as well as completing an Eagle Project to benefit the community. Jacob's project was to construct a barn-themed sun shelter for the Joyful Noise Preschool and the Waukee United Methodist Church. Jacob also went above and beyond the requirements by completing more than the minimum required number of merit badges.

Jacob has been involved in scouting since he became a Tiger Cub more than 11 years ago. Jacob's father, John Pomeroy, is also an Eagle Scout and current assistant Scout Master to Troop 178 from Waukee, Iowa.

Mr. Speaker, the example set by this young man and his supportive family demonstrates the rewards of hard work, dedication and perseverance. I am honored to represent John Pomeroy and his family in the United States Congress. I know that all of my colleagues will join me in congratulating him on earning an Eagle Scout ranking and will wish him continued success in his future education and career.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today congratulate Tressa Bartholomew of Carlisle, Iowa on recently celebrating her 106th birthday on March 30, 2011. Today she has four children, thirteen grandchildren, 29 great-grandchildren, and 43 great-great-grandchildren.

There have been many changes that have occurred during the past one hundred and six years. Since Tressa's birth we have revolutionized air travel and walked on the moon. We have invented the television and the Internet. We have fought in wars overseas, seen the rise and fall of Soviet communism and the birth of new democracies. Tressa has lived through nineteen United States Presidents and twenty-five Governors of Iowa. In her lifetime the population of the United States has more than tripled.

I congratulate Tressa Bartholomew for reaching this milestone of a birthday. I am extremely honored to represent her in Congress and I wish her happiness and health in her future years.

I thank the gentleman from Kentucky.

The idea that this is somehow artificially created is unbelievable. Is there any memory over on the other side here about what happened last year for the first time since the Budget Act of 1974--that you didn't even attempt to pass a budget last year? You initiated what the majority on your side, both in the House and the Senate, and the Presidency, did not pass one bill into law. That's why we're here today. You know that's not artificial.

And I'm glad they got the talking points down from Senator Schumer about being extreme. I tell you what's extreme is to continue to spend this country into oblivion. You're going to have our kids and grandchildren working for the Chinese if you continue this.

And that's why, Madam Speaker, today I rise in support of H.R. 1363, the Troop Funding Bill. It's unfortunate that we have to be here in this way today. But we have no choice because of the inaction of the other side from last year.

This bill will provide much-needed certainty for our troops in the field and would keep the government open for another week. It also makes $12 billion in cuts in other programs, most of which were proposed by the President and by the Democrats--the cuts that we're talking about that are so supposedly draconian out of a $3.6 trillion budget we can't cut $12 billion, apparently.

Now, many in the Senate would like to see the Department of Defense budget used as an offset to continue the spending binge we're on here in Washington. But we cannot allow our troops to be used as a bargaining chip in negotiation. It's time to take the Department of Defense off the table and fund our troops for the rest of this year.

Our brave men and women in the field are engaged in three different wars--one just started again by this President--around the globe and they deserve to know that they have the full support of this Congress.

We owe it to those sacrificing for us both home and abroad to ensure that there is not an interruption of their pay. This measure continues to show the House Republicans' commitment to our men and women in uniform while protecting the cause of freedom around the world, as well as our commitment to fiscal sanity in cutting spending while keeping the government open.

If this is rejected by the House and Senate Democrats and the White House--and it's amazing the Commander in Chief of the military is going to veto a bill that will fund his troops. I've never heard anything more outrageous.

I thank the chairman for yielding time.

Mr. Speaker, I do rise in support of this joint resolution. It's not because I want to, but because it is necessary to support it today. It is necessary because we are stuck in a situation that results from the previous majority's lack of completing its work last year. I think we need to step back and just look at the situation that we were handed this year.

For the first time since the Budget Act of 1974, Mr. Speaker, the House failed to pass a budget last year. The House also failed--except for two occasions--to pass appropriation bills. The Senate did nothing. So what we are left with today is this mess that we are in with no fiscal year 2011 budget, no appropriation bills passed last year, nothing done. So we are given this mess today to clean up. And what we need is a little more time.

But in the meantime, we are going to cut spending, $6 billion of cuts, $2 billion a week for the 3 weeks that this bill will be in place. It's not enough. We have got to look at the overall problem that we have in this country: $14.3 trillion of debt, an annual 1-year deficit of $1.65 trillion.

Now, while this just scratches the surface, we have got to address long-term spending here in Washington, DC. We have got to look at not just the discretionary side, which this bill does, but look at all the entitlements. We are only addressing about 15 percent of the whole budget in this bill. We have got to make sure that we look at the other 85 percent which is mandatory, which is the other spending that is out there that has caused this explosion of debt that we have. This is a very good first step of going forward to really get a handle on the spending.

Also, Mr. Speaker, I would ask that the White House finally get involved and show some leadership as far as trying to get our fiscal house in order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the achievement of Alex Gurganus, a seventh-grade student at Ames Middle School in Ames, Iowa. Alex was recently named one of only four state winners of the VSA/CVS Call for Art.

Alex's participation in and of itself is stellar. Alex attained this honor despite being visually impaired. In the classroom, Alex requires large print, magnifiers, and a closed circuit TV system to facilitate his learning and compensate for zero vision in his right eye and low visual capacity in his left eye.

However, Alex did not allow these obstacles to deter him as he has been meticulously perfecting his award-winning artwork, ``Design by Surprise,'' for the last three years. When composing a piece of art, Alex must memorize where the colors are on the palette in addition to utilizing a hand-held magnifying dome to ensure perfection.

The example set by this young man demonstrates the rewards of hard work, dedication and perseverance, and I am honored to represent Alex Gurganus and his family in the United States Congress. I know that all of my colleagues will join me in congratulating him on overcoming such a difficult hurdle as a means to achieve such wonderful results. I speak for all my colleagues as I wish Alex continued success in his future education and career.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to pay tribute to Dennis Brinkman, Vietnam War veteran and Alpha Gamma Rho brother from Iowa State University, and his wife, Janice Kay Reeder Brinkman, on the special occasion of their 40th wedding anniversary. This special day will take place on March 27, 2011, but family will be celebrating the event in Galena, Illinois, this weekend--March 11-13, 2011.

Mr. and Mrs. Dennis Brinkman were married on March 27, 1971, in West Union, Iowa. Together they raised one child, Ann Marie. Dennis has farmed near Greene and Charles City, Iowa, since 1972. His operation has included beef cattle, farrow-to-finish hog production, soybeans and corn. Jan, a graduate from the University of Northern Iowa, started her career as an elementary school teacher. When Ann Marie turned two, she began working for Greene Limestone Company as a bookkeeper.

Dennis and Jan currently reside in rural Greene, Iowa. Dennis continues to expand his

crop business and serves on the AgVantage FS Board of Directors. Jan is an office manager at Allied Manatts Group L.L.C. in Charles City, Iowa, and an active member of a local mother's club that helps support the Coats for Kids program at St. John Evangelical Lutheran Church.

I salute this lovely couple on the 40th year of their life together, and I know that my colleagues in the United States Congress join me, their friends and family in honoring them on this special occasion.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the achievement of Nicolle Amos, a nurse practitioner in Mason City, Iowa. Nicolle was recently named the Iowa Nurse Practitioner of the Year by the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners (AANP).

Established in 1985, the AANP was the first national organization to organize and advocate for issues affecting nurse practitioners. It currently serves eleven different regions and represents over 135,000 nurse practitioners in the United States. In addition to promoting education and research, the AANP advocates at all levels of government to shape various health policies and to recognize ``NPs as providers of high-quality, cost-effective, and personalized healthcare.'' The AANP gives the Nurse Practitioner of the Year Award to a nurse practitioner in each state who demonstrates excellence in their area of practice.

Nicolle has a degree as a family nurse practitioner as well as a master's degree in nursing. She worked for seven years as a registered nurse before becoming a nurse practitioner. In November 2005, Nicolle opened her own practice, North Iowa Family Health Care. Although initially staffed only by herself, Nicolle now employs three other individuals--a receptionist, a medical assistant and a licensed practical nurse. She sees an average of 13-16 patients every day, and on Wednesdays she provides health services to local jail inmates. She believes that ``God gives you a purpose in life,'' and that that purpose is to meet her patients' needs to the best of her ability.

I commend Nicolle on the hard work and quality of care she is providing to her patients in Iowa. I know that my colleagues in the United States Congress will join me in congratulating her for the receipt of this award. I wish nothing but success and happiness to Nicolle, her husband Matt, and children Olivia and John.

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize the achievements of the eighth-grade students at Carlisle Middle School in Carlisle, Iowa. These students recently finished first in the nation in the FBI's Safe Online Surfing (SOS) Internet Challenge in December 2010.

The SOS Internet Challenge is a national competition that seeks to educate elementary and middle school students about the importance of safety when using the internet. The topics include protecting personal information, online predators, cyberbullying, instant messaging, social networking, copyright, and more. Scores in this competition are determined by a series of web-based quizzes the students take after completing the program. Over 1,000 eighth-grade students from 47 schools in 17 states participated in the December SOS Internet Challenge.

The Carlisle Middle School eighth-grade students completed the SOS Internet Challenge under the direction of their technology instructor Julie Thompson. While the class as a whole placed first in the challenge, those students who received the top scores were Bailey Garner, Kaleigh Haus, Max Becker, Lynn Huang, and Josh Hagedorn. These five students were awarded FBI bags that included school supplies and certificates.

I commend the eighth-grade students at Carlisle Middle School for their exemplary work in the SOS Internet Challenge. In this world of advanced technology that allows for increased networking, it is imperative that our children know how to keep themselves and their personal information safe.

I know that my colleagues in the United States Congress will join me in congratulating these students on their accomplishments. It is an honor to serve as their representative, and I wish them the best of luck in the future.

I thank the gentleman for yielding.

And I appreciate very much what's going on and the reduction of spending. I'm just very concerned that this is not really a thoughtful way of doing it, that if we're after waste, fraud and abuse in our budget, this is going to cripple us as far as finding out where those places are. It will continue to fund items, lines in the budget that have waste, fraud and abuse and will not eliminate those.

And also, when you look at just the transportation portion, I think the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Olver) brought the point up too, but this would, in fact, stop air traffic control for a period of weeks. And I don't think many of us here would like to see our airports close down for several weeks because we don't have air traffic control. And that's exactly what would happen.

Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment clearly limits consumer choice, and is yet another attack on our Nation's progress to try and achieve energy security. The technology that he is trying to prohibit basically would allow individuals to have a choice as to whether, what percentage plan they would want, whether E-10, E-30, E-50 or E-85, whatever suits their best needs, their affordability and their performance and gas mileage.

It would actually make us much more dependent long term on foreign oil because you are going to limit the choices that are there. And without the blender pumps that he wants to prohibit, most Americans are left with just one option, and that's the E-10.

If we continue to limit the amount of U.S.-produced ethanol we can use in our vehicles, we will be continuing to be beholden to foreign sources of energy, and we will be importing more oil every year.

I urge my colleagues to vote against this.

I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Chairman, I will be very brief. This is limiting consumer choice; it's going to increase our dependence on foreign oil.

I would again ask my colleagues to vote against this ill-founded amendment.

I yield back the balance of my time.

I thank the gentleman very much for yielding.

I understand the gentleman from Oklahoma represents oil and the reason that he is doing this, but current

government regulations restrict the ethanol blend to 10 percent by volume. Meanwhile, ethanol producers have hit the 10 percent cap and are producing more ethanol than can be used under current restrictions that are in place.

I have to correct the gentleman when he said EPA mandates this. It's Congress, us, that mandated the 36 billion gallons of renewable fuel by 2022. And it's essential, with that mandate from Congress, this is not EPA, that we increase E10 to E15 to continue our investment in renewable fuel for the economy.

Raising the limit will accelerate the use of renewable fuels made in the U.S. We are not importing this oil, Mr. Chairman. We are lessening our dependence on foreign sources of oil and encouraging continued investment and research for advanced biofuels like cellulosic ethanol.

As importantly, raising the limit will grow our economy here in the U.S., create about 136,000 jobs in the United States. This is oil that we are not importing from oversees and spending billions and billions of dollars with our military to defend the oil coming into this country.

These are good-paying jobs; they are very excellent as far as jobs in rural America. They cannot be outsourced overseas. Science supports E15. It's the most tested fuel in history, with the EPA and the Department of Energy stating that the higher ethanol blend does not harm engine durability nor emissions equipment for vehicles aged 2001 and newer, which represents more than 70 percent of the vehicles on the road today in the United States.

It's clear that science supports the decision. There's no doubt that the E15 blend limit is good for our economy, it's good for our energy independence and everybody talks about all of the above.

This is part of all of the above of energy independence for the United States. It's good for continuing investment in the renewable fuels, energy and for the rural parts of this country that need an awful lot of help these days.

I certainly oppose this amendment.

Will the gentleman yield?

I appreciate the gentleman yielding.

I, too, share his commitment to NextGen, and I believe that this program is essential to achieving the much-needed improvements in our aviation system. The committee has consulted with the FAA. We believe that these modest savings will be beneficial to the taxpayers while providing the FAA with the funds necessary to continue to do the important work in bringing NextGen to fruition.

Mr. Chair, on rollcall No. 47, I was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted ``no''.

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

I thank the chairman, and I appreciate the gentleman's concern on section 1746 of the continuing resolution that some people think would negatively impact renewable fuel standards. That rider in the bill specifically prohibits the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources. However, reports that this provision will also block EPA from setting standards for the 2012 Renewable Fuel Standard are totally unfounded. The Energy and Commerce Committee confirms this and everyone else. The gentleman, I know, used to be a member of that committee.

I think it is really important to clarify that the rider in the CR is narrowly focused on EPA's new stationary source permitting authority and does not affect EPA's renewable fuels program.

Under the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act, which was referred to, Congress expressly stated that the Renewable Fuel Standard does not, and I say not, constitute regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. The fundamental purpose of the Renewable Fuel Standard is to ensure our Nation's energy security and to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of oil while providing a valuable incentive for the production of agriculture.

As an Iowan, I understand the vast importance of agriculture to our economy by creating thousands of good-paying jobs and contributing numerous economic benefits to our rural communities. I understand concerns that may have been expressed. However, it is very clear that the renewable fuel standard falls outside EPA's rulemaking authority addressing climate change. I want to assure my colleagues and the people of Iowa that this legislation will not affect the renewable fuel standard or bring an end to the program, as some have erroneously suggested.

Mr. Chairman, rules have already been written. Anything in this bill is prospective. We already have the standard in place, and this does not affect that anyway. In the Senate, Senator Rockefeller, a Democrat over there--and I hate to see this be politicized because it should not be a political issue--but the Democrat Senator from West Virginia has this identical language and nobody has said anything about that. He wants to have a prohibition for 2 years. The Energy and Commerce Committee is having debates as to making permanent as far as the prohibition. And I have not heard any concerns about that.

So it is, I think, very unfortunate that some information is being put forth on the floor of the House here that is not true. The Energy and Commerce Committee has said over and over again that this does not affect renewable fuel standards. It will have no impact as far as ethanol is concerned.

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

I thank the gentleman from Idaho.

If there are people concerned about this, why didn't they come to us and talk to us before? We talked about the different groups out there, and that's because they've been given bad information that's not true. It is clear from the 2007 bill--and if someone would read it around here, they would understand that the renewable fuel standard is not affected by this. It is specifically outside the jurisdiction of what we're talking about, and so to make any assertion otherwise is simply giving erroneous information purposely on the floor. And that's very, very unfortunate because you do have people that are being told something that is not true, and now they're getting all worked up about it. I think it's very, very unfortunate.

We had a meeting this last week with the Iowa delegation talking to each other. If you have concerns, why don't you bring it forth so we can take care of the problem? If you want to have the amendment, I would have supported it, but it's not needed. It is absolutely fictitious, this idea that this is somehow going to affect the renewable fuel standard. I think it's very unfortunate that this issue has become something that has been dreamt up for other reasons, I think. That's very, very unfortunate because we should need to work together for energy independence in this country and to lessen our dependence on foreign sources of energy.

Point of Order

Mr. Chairman, I reserve a point of order.

I would continue to reserve.

Mr. Chairman, the amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill.

The amendment is not in order under section 3(j)(3) of House Resolution 5, 112th Congress, which states:

``It shall not be in order to consider an amendment to a general appropriations bill proposing a net increase in budget authority in the bill unless considered en bloc with another amendment or amendments proposing an equal or greater decrease in such budget authority pursuant to clause 2(f) of rule XXI.''

The amendment proposes a net increase in budget authority in the bill in violation of such section.

I ask for a ruling from the Chair.

Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that the remainder of the bill through page 357, line 22 be considered as read, printed in the Record, and open to amendment at any point.

I thank the gentleman from Georgia for the time.

Mr. Speaker, what a difference a new Congress makes. We have seen in the last 4 years on the Appropriations Committee a lack of any kind of transparent open process. This last year on the other side of the aisle when they were in control, they didn't even pass a budget, a blueprint for spending. And that is why this year, Mr. Speaker, we have a $1.65 trillion deficit. One year, $1.65 trillion. We can't continue.

The President's budget that he brought up, which is not just dead on arrival, it is debt on arrival, what this says is that we are going to double the privately held national debt, another $7 trillion. This is not fiscal restraint. This is not sanity.

I have four grandchildren, and the reason I am here is to make sure that they have a future. We cannot continue this outrageous spending that is going on in Washington. And when you look at this bill that we are talking about on the floor, $100 billion off of the President's proposal for this past year, that is less than 1/16th of the annual deficit. It is scratching the surface. But because there has been no budget, there has been no fiscal restraint at all in the previous two Congresses, this thing has totally grown way beyond what is comprehensible by any normal person.

That is why, Mr. Speaker, this is the first step to bring some fiscal sanity back to Washington, D.C., to actually understand what the ramifications are long-term in spending. We cannot continue. And it is amazing to me in this rule to have an open process, where people can actually have amendments, I have had some Democrat colleagues come up and say, you mean, we are actually going to have amendments? They don't know how to handle that, because we have had a closed process for the last 4 years. We have second term Members of Congress that have never seen an open rule on an appropriations bill. Let's pass this rule and get our house in order.

I thank the gentleman from Kentucky.

Mr. Chairman, I would just maybe respond a little bit to what the gentleman from Massachusetts just said. The fact of the matter is there will not be a veteran, a homeless vet, that will not get a voucher. The fact of the matter is there are 30,000 vouchers available today. Only 19,000 of those have been used. There are 11,000 vouchers waiting; and the problem basically is with the Department, with HUD and VA, as far as trying to write the rules to actually get these people the vouchers they need.

So any kind of characterization that we're putting vets out in the cold is absolutely untrue. You have your opinion, but the facts speak for themselves.

Now also we are not reducing any such section 8 vouchers. They will remain. No one is going to be put out anywhere. We maintain those programs for those folks, and to characterize it in any way differently simply is not factual.

Will the gentleman yield?

There are 11,000 vouchers sitting there unused today. There are 19,000 that have been issued. The gentleman knows that we are not cutting those. There are 11,000 still available under this bill. And we are going to review this as we go through for the next fiscal year, 2012.

I appreciate that. I thank the gentleman.