an organization. sometimes i hear from that organization and sometimes i haven't, you got another group that comes and says the opposite, i like to think of common sense when it comes to coming to the and putting together logical and efficient legislation. the fact that these three sort of disparate groups of people say we support this, i think something is going on here we should take a close look at and consider in supporting. i want to talk specifically about the jobs that will be created by this because i had a very unique conversation with the president of the largest utility company from florida where i'm from. . he said they're building the largest solar plant in the world in florida. we like to call ourselves the sunshine state. we think that's a good place for it. there are solar plants in other parts of the world. but they're building this in florida. what he told us was they are very unhappy about the fact that when they were wlg this huge plant, -- building this huge plant, hundreds of millions of dollars, they would

have to import the mirrors from germany. i said, why is that? he said, well, we don't build them in the united states. there is no incentives to do them here. if they built them in georgia or florida or california, we would build them here because they would be far less expensive. just the shipping cost adds such an expensive piece to the equation. that to me strikes at the heart of this whole point. why aren't we doing everything we can to create these kinds of jobs in the united states and create the incentives? well, the american investment and recovery act we passed a few months ago has the kind of tax incentives and many of the components to begin to encourage this type of industry for creating jobs in the united states. i want these jobs to be in florida or other parts of the united states because they're good quality jobs and would support a good industry. another area which i think we talked about nationally is wind power. big part of what's going on around the world right now, a

lot of that is built overseas. but here's another good example. a typical wind turbine has 8,000 parts and is made of 250 tons of steel. americans makes steel, we fabricate, we assemble, we can deliver that to a wind farm in the united states at far less of a cost than if it was done overseas. and guess what, you can't outsource the labor or the people that put these things together and install them. can't do it overseas. again, an idea whose time has come. the great thing about this energy bill, this is the kind of forward thinking that will create the next generation of jobs. whether it's wind or wave or solar or nuclear, any combination of things that will make this country more energy secure, smarter, more efficient and will advance us into the next generation of not only energy but make this country very strong from a national security point of view and a job point of view. so i look forward to working with my colleagues to pass this bill, move this country forward and make us more secure. and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired.

the gentleman from illinois, mr. shimkus, is recognized for five minutes. mr. shimkus: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. shimkus: thank you, madam speaker. it's interesting to follow my colleague from florida because this cap and trade bill that's going to the floor will definitely cost jobs. and have a lot of examples to promote that and prove that. the pennsylvania public utility commission said in a memo to members of his delegation that, however, if the waxman-markey bill would pass pennsylvania is looking at a bleak scenario by 2020. a net loss of as many as 66,000 jobs, a sizeable hike in electricity bills of residential customers and increase in natural gas prices. you don't want to believe the

public utility commission, just believe john dingell, chairman emeritus. he's quoted here as saying, nobody in this country realizes that cap and trade is a tax. and it's a big one. and if you don't believe that, just listen to the comments made by now president obama in january of 2008. under my plan of cap and trade system, electricity costs would necessarily skyrocket. now, in an economy like we have today, the last thing you want to do is affect jobs and coss the loss of jobs, either by -- cause the loss of jobs, either by moving fossil fuels or by raising electricity rates. i always bring this poster to the floor. these are miners that lost their jobs in the last iteration of the clean air act. this one mine had 1,200 miners. after the passage of the clean air act they lost their jobs. this is in kinkade, illinois.

here's a report from the illinois department of natural resources. listen to what happened after the clean air act of 1990, the amendment. exxon coal monterrey 2 closed by market conditions brought about by the clean air act. the next one, zigler coal, market conditions by the clean air act amendments. we also have this one, monterrey 10, market conditions brought out by the clean air act amendments. and many more on this report. what a cap and trade bill does is cap fossil fuel use. it says you cannot use this anymore. what is a fossil fuel? it's coal, it's natural gas, it's crude oil, it's what we use to create the strongest economy in this world. and if you cap it and we have electricity demands go up, only

one thing can happen, higher electricity rates. now, my friends on the other side were serious about carbon dioxide. in their bill they would forcefully push for the expansion of use of nuclear power. but is there in their bill, no. nuclear power emitts no carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. that's why many of us on our side really questions the sincerity of our friends on the other side because there's no major promotion of nuclear power. republicans have an alternative. it's the all-american energy security act. it's very simple. it says we like energy, we like to use it, and we want all people to come up with ideas to compete for use by consumers driving down prices. these areas, the outer continental shelf. we would exploit natural gas and crude oil reserves. we would take the revenues to go to renewable. wind and solar power, which is

being exploited around the country right now. we would make fuel from coal. we would take coal, 250 years worth of recoverable coal, turn it into liquid fuels, thus decreasing our alliance on foreign oil. and biofuels, which is soy diesel, corn, cellulosic and the like. and the great add in the all-american energy security act from the republicans is we need to build 100 new nuclear power plants in the next 20 years. that is a commitment on lower electricity prices for the consumer. and that is a down payment on energy security. we have 31 permits now in the process of going through. we only have money for credits for three nuclear power plants to be built. that doesn't touch the increased demand that we're going to have. so either you have job loss,

higher prices and a cap and tax, demand control economy, energy future, or you have an all-of the above strategy which sets -- all-of-the-above strategy which sets all standards and says bring more supply and lower prices and creating jobs. thank you, madam speaker. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from indiana, mr. pence, for five minutes. mr. pence: thank you, madam speaker. i would ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pence: madam speaker, i come to this floor at a time of extraordinary moment on the global stage. according to the islamic republic news agencies eag, the official news agency of iran, president mahmoud ahmadinejad supposedly won his election over his primary opponent on

12, june, 2009. but from the very moment that that election result was announced, the international community and the international press called it into question. one of the bay sees for that even before -- bases for that even before the demonstrations took place was that these were paper ballots but that the official government results of the election were announced literally within hours of the polls being closed. various media outlets of the world questioned the authenticity of the results. mr. moussaoui has launched a legal appeal. on the day of the election, mobile phones communications were interrupted. heavy electronic jamming, disturbing broadcasts. news websites were blocked by iranian authorities and they've arrested political journalists.

they've had two days of extraordinary unrest. the bbc reported that recent rallies in the streets of tehran were the biggest demonstrations in the islamic republic's 30-year history. the protest, according to news reports, became violent. and pro-government forces attacked demonstrators in the last 24 hours, causing at least one fatality. we are witnessing a tinmen in tehran. -- tiananmen in tehran, and the united states of america must stand in the gap on behalf of those brave iranian citizens who are standing for free and fair elections, democracy and basic rights. freedom in fact may be flowering in iran as hundreds of thousands rally for democracy and free elections. while i appreciate president obama's comments yesterday at the white house that he was, quote, troubled by the violence

, and his belief that the voices of the iranian people should, quote, heard and respected, it seems by myelitis that this administration has yet to express the unqualified support of the american people for those who are courageously taking to the streets for free elections and for democracy in iran. let me say from my heart, the american cause is freedom and in this cause the american people will not be silent. here or abroad. if the president of the united states won't express the unqualified support of our nation for the disdense in the streets of tehran, this congress must. today i'm introducing a resolution that will do just that. it will express its concern regarding the irregularities of the presidential election of 12 june, 2009.

it will affirm our believe in the universalality of human rights and the democratic elections. and lastly and most importantly, madam speaker, it will express the support of the american people for all iranian citizens who struggle for freedom, civil liberties and the protection of the rule of law. believe it or not in my small town of columbus, indiana, i grew up next door to a hungarian immigrant who fled hungary in the wake of the soviet repression of the hungarian revolution in 1956. i sat often with julius, now passed away, and heard of the way the hungarian people, inspired by our calls for freedom, stood up for their own freedom. and as brett stevens recounts in today's "wall street journal", we stood by idly. we didn't want to interfere. and the soviet tanks rolled.

we cannot stand idly by, speak of iran's sovereignty, speak of her own right to choose her own leadership at a time when hundreds of thousands of iranians are risking their liberty and even for their lives to stand up for free elections and democracy. ronald reagan said, quote, there's no arsenal or no weapon, the arsenals of the world so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. all of us desire a fresh start with iran. and it seems from news reports and the extraordinary images coming from the streets of iran that millions of iranians long for a new start in their government. there is a reformist movement afoot in iran. today i'll introduce a resolution. i urge all of my colleagues in both parties in joining me to express support for these brave courageous men and women and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair recognizes the

gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, for five minutes. mr. gohmert: thank you, madam speaker. and i do appreciate this opportunity. you know, there are so many people out of work around this country. we know since president obama took office two million more people have lost jobs. it's staggering and quite sobering. i recently met with many people who are unemployed in a north lufkin church. i guess virtually all were african-americans. these were people ready to go to work, willing to go to work, good strong work ethic, had families, keeping caring about their community and their families. and so it got me to looking and thinking, what can i do to use my position to try to help people get jobs?

there's the texas work force commission that does a good job trying to have job fairs, but it turned out by using my position, partnering with other groups, chamber of different groups, we were able to have around 50 employers with over 1,000 jobs to offer but even that doesn't satisfy all of the needs for all of the jobs people are needing who are out of work. . it did sensitize me for the fact look around for job opportunities. where is this nation spending money that might go to help people who are unemployed where they could get jobs? we have another job fair coming up in long view in a couple weeks and we are hoping it will be a successful. as i look around and see the millions of dollars being spent and i hear from constituents and having a heart wanting to help

them, i'm brought to the question after we hear about the uighurs, four of them going to bermuda, although we were promised great transparency and that was one of the things that appealed to the voters of the united states, that if we elect the -- this administration we will have complete transparency, everything will be transparent. we'll know what they are spending money on. we'll know what they are doing. well, we don't know. they won't tell us what money has been spent to pay bermuda to take four uighurs. some are estimating $12 million apiece. they don't think it's very much. maybe $12 million apiece or so. we know that supposedly other uighurs are going from guantanamo to pa lou -- palau. one report i read estimated that over the last 14 years going back to the middle of the clinton administration, we paid

them about $852 million just for aid and so there's some question are we going to pay them more millions to take this or since their 15-year agreement is up are they willing to take these -- but the bottom line is, millions and millions of dollars are being paid to take 17 uighurs, for those that don't know those are people in china who because of their religious beliefs or adverse to china, even we know that these 17 were -- and we know these 17 were captured in terrorist camps in afghanistan. some say they weren't being trained to terrorize us, but they were in terrorist camps in afghanistan. so the question many are asking now is for those two million of us who lost our jobs since january of this year, what terrorist camp can we go to to train so that maybe we could

spend the rest ever our lives alt u.s. ex-- of our lives at u.s. expense at the beaches of bermuda? we saw the people, the pictures of the four uighurs in bermudea. they seemed be to be enjoying themselves, laughing, cutting up, out there on the beach, the waves. those uighurs who have gone to palau, how many millions we pay, we don't know. i have got a bunch of constituents who are willing to go train in terrorist camps in afghanistan if necessary if our government will pay millions of dollars to send them to the beaches. also one other point, we know there's been no transparency with the auto task force. we don't know what they are being paid. we just know that this group that's never run anything in the car business is running the car businesses and dictating what will happen. well, i've got lots of people that are every bit as unqualified to run the car buness in my district who are

unemployed. they want that job. where do they aly to run the car businesses of america and get on the auto task force? we want to know because they'd like that job. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until noon today. email at c-span.org, and twitter

us at c-span/wj. aside from the funding issues,

which we will get to, could you walk us legislatively through the process that is going to take place over the next couple of weeks to set up the agenda for a vote on health care. >> sure. it is a critical couple of weeks. before the july 4 recess,he three committees in the house that are working on health care reform are supposed to put out their draft bill potentially this week. this week is a big week for the senate finance committee. expecting a draft bill tomorrow. there will be some blacks, but they're expected to fill in by friday, and they are going to start their markup next tuesday. again, wednesday, the senate health education, labor, and pensions committee was scheduled to begin in markup today, but if push it to tomorrow. -- to begin a markup today, but they have pushed it to tomorrow.

at the same time, potentially leaving tens of millions of people uninsured -- that is the calendar in the next two weeks, but whether the committees released their bills, start their markups, that will determine whether they stay on track for a vote before the august recess. host: will these bills only deal with how to pay for these efforts? guest: no, these bills are comprehensive. the senate finance bill is comprehensive, and it will include how to finance it, which is the big unanswered question. but the senate health committee -- that does not say how to pay for it. the senate finance committee will do that. the ways and means committee will have to weigh in as well. host: the story in "the wall street journal" looking at payment for these kinds of

things, looking at benefits and whether they will be taxed or not. guest: we all talk about the public plan and how controversial that is. this is another hugely controversial topic, taxing health benefits. max baucus, the senate finance committee chairman, sees it as the largest pot of money that congress can go to to fund a health-care overhaul. but it will stiff -- but it will face stiff opposition from unions to do not want to see health benefits taxed. they see their members as taking a big hit. the president campaigned against this, so it puts him in a sticky position politically. a lot of land mines there. but with max baucus being so -- he is almost an unequivocal when he talks about it that i think we should expect to see some form of benefits being taxed, at least coming out of his committee. host: you talk about amendments to these bills.

will republicans win to get their voice on this issue? guest: that seems to be their only choice right now, at least in the health committee. they have a lot of problems with that bill, and we are going to see a good number of them coming from them to try to change it to their liking. host: the president talked in a speech yesterday over the weeks leading up to this that he brought a lot of different groups to the table to make this happen. how are those groups going to respond not only to yesterday's speech, but also the efforts that take place over the next couple of weeks, and who are we expected to hear from as far as these various forces over the next couple of weeks? guest: there are a couple of big players. none have really broken away publicly. they -- there are rumblings that groups like the chamber of commerce and the national federation of independent businesses are not happy over what they saw at the health committee last week. in my discussions with them,

they are starting to make their concerns no more, which is a change from the previous six months, when a lot of stakeholders were reluctant to talk negatively about the process, so you are going to start seeing groups being willing to speak up and saying we do not like this. there are some meetings they were having with stakeholders that view the issue the way they do, some strategy meetings. but they were telling me they're really waiting for the senate finance committee, for what they propose, and they see senator baucus and senator grassley as possibly a more sympathetic ear, talking about what they want. that will help determine their strategy. host: our guest will be with us during the course of the hour. if you want to weigh in on it, the numbers will be on your screen. email is available at journal@c- span.org.

district heights, maryland, you are up first. caller: i want to say this. when it comes down to the money for the banks, they have no problem. when it comes down to funding these wars, they have no problem. that is number 1. number two, every senator and congressman already has government health care. i would suggest this, that we cut their health care and make them pay for their health care and their families out of their salary, and i guarantee they will come up very quickly with something that can benefit every american in this country. number 3, there are some congressmen and senators who are writing these bills whose family members have stock in the pharmaceutical industry and in other medical areas, and they should not be allowed to sit and form any bill that deals with the american people. we should not allow the politicians to divide as republican and democrat on an

issue as important as health care. host: john, you talked about problems. do you think that the legislators are going to come together on this issue in the next couple of weeks? >caller: no, i do not. this concerns the american people, which is why they can drag their feet and do what they want to do. when it comes to the banks, it takes two or three weeks, maybe a month or so. host: we hear from scott. good morning. caller: pedro, there is a fact -- monopolies create two things, higher prices and lower quality for whatever service the monopoly controls. when they can figure out a way to define economic law, until they can do that, we need to forget about a government monopoly or government control

of our health-care system. we will have higher prices and lower quality. that is all there is to it. host: on "the wall street journal" this morning, we talked about payment. there is a story looking at the workings within the committee on how to pay for health care and gives some details about the discussions going on. they write that under one financing proposal, health-care benefits worth more than $17,000 would be taxed as regular income. the cap would be allowed to grow annually for people the familiar with committee discussions. under another option, the cap would be set at about $20,000 boat with a less generous annual adjustment. max baucus hopes to release health care legislation friday, setting up four votes for next week. shreveport, louisiana, shelton, on our independent line. good morning from go caller: i

agree with the first -- good morning. caller: i agree with the first caller. the president, the congressperson, has let the american people down. all the industrialized countries in the world have some form of single-payer health care. and to try -- the whole debate is this -- the whole debate is just profit-driven, trying to keep the insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies, and the doctors, which should be basically thinking about the health and welfare instead of their profits. host: so what should congress do with the president's proposal for health care? caller: i do not think congress is going to do anything. their hands are in the pie