gained not just their respect but their fondness during the months of training for their deployment in afghanistan. he could be harsh, but was fair and imparted to his men a sense of their potential. end quote. . other soldiers echoed these comments, saying how blare pushed them beyond their comfort levels to be their best and was like a father figure for many of them. madam speaker, sergeant blare carried these same characteristics to his service as a gordon county sheriff's deputy and a drug task force officer for many years in calhoun, georgia. in addition to his great service to our nation and his community john blair was also a dedicated fa -- dedicated family man looking forward to

spending quality time with his grandson when he returned home. what an amazing example of courage, selflessness and a love of country that sergeant blare provided, not only for his young grandson, but madam speaker for all of us. my prayers go out to his family, my deepest gratitude goes out to first sergeant blare for his selfless sack -- blair for his selfless sacrifice for our nation. i ask all members, join me in honoring the distinguished memory of first sergeant john blair and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: thank you. the chair recognizes mr. souder the chair recognizes mr. souder indiana for five minutes. mr. souder: thank you, madam speaker. i come tonight a little stunned. quite frankly, i didn't think the energy bill, the cap and trade bill would actually reach

a point where it would come in front of the house, for that matter, the senate. when we're in the unemployment state we are in america, it seems rather ridiculous to bring bills that would put so many hardworking people out of work. the cap and trade bill, or as many of us call it, the cap and tax bill, or what a manufacturing district like mine would call a cap-and-trade-our-jobs-to-china bill. i have eight counties in my district. the mean of unemployment is 15%. two counties are at 19%. let me tell you about my best county. my best county, allen county, my home, anchored by fort wayne with a little under 3,000 people has an unemployment rate approaching 11%. we have one of the biggest pickup plants in the world,

produces the silverado and sierra, i have been fighting hard to make sure they aren't knocked out of business. we have our largest property taxpayer, the g.m. plant is the second largest, is a mall that's part of general growth properties that's in chapter 11. one of our largest employers is a financial company that has applied for tarp funds. fort wayne foundry closed three plants because they are a major g.m. and chrysler supplier. now we're being asked to tax them through their energy. let me talk a little bit about how we get energy in indiana. we're 85% coal. we're 15% nuclear. the heritage study showing impact by congressional district says my congressional district is the number one damaged district. the new figures from the national association of manufacturers this week show that my district is the number one manufacturing district. it's unusual. if you came to northeast

indiana, and i represent basecally fort wayne up to south bend, going along the michigan line and ohio line, you drive through an area with lots of water, rivers, in between is beautiful green farmland we aren't dry and parched like much of america, we have a green area. that gives us water, essential to most manufacturing. you can't build major manufacturing facilities where there isn't adequate water. many, many of those farms where people still farm we don't have the big corporate farms, we have small farms because one person from each sfamly, sometimes multifamily on one farm are working at auto parts plants and other plants throughout the district. thousands and thousands and thousands, they are at direct threat we talk more about our energy. i've been to the alternative energy labs in colorado. sandia labs in new mexico.

major places where we look at alternative energy. indiana cannot get wind power. with we cannot get -- we don't have a way to get to 20% in the traditional alternative energy. some of my friends actually i've known for many years are putting in one of the biggest wind farms in our whole -- the second most windy area in the state of indiana, it's going to be miles and miles. we'll be lucky to get to 4% if we build every windmill you can do in the state of indiana. in solar, we don't get as much sun as arizona and nevada. we are pushing solar energy as hard as we can. one of my good friends has a new solar company working with the germans that can get better solar power at homes. but let's get this straight. i have two steel dynamics plants. the most efficient steel processer in the united states. five new corps plants.

s.d.i. in one of their plants takes as much energy as the city of fort wayne with nearly 250,000 to 300,000 people and everything therein. you cannot power a steel plant with solar panels and windmills. if we are going to make things in america if we aren't going to ship everything to china, we going to have to have reasonable, workable energy strategies. there's a company in fort wayne that's been highlighted in "the new york times" on geothermal called water furnace. california alone could save seven power plants. we need to push in every appropriations bill geothermal. i have an amendment proposed in the armed services bill to have many military facilities use geothermal. we're working with companies to save 15% of energy in air-conditioning. parker hannefin through an

earmark in their funds think they can get 20% more power out of wind turbines. guardian which makes wind shields, is converting part of their plant and working with spain and other places to make solar panels that don't crack. we are looking at major breck throughs but we cannot destroy the manufacturing base of america. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the gentleman from texas, mr. carter is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. carter: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the speaker for allowing me to speak tonight. i'm back again to talk about issues that are important, i

think, to this house, they're important to the american people, and they're especially important to the concept of leadership in this house of representatives. and just where it's going to go. i want to go back for a moment, before we go into current events, and talk about some past events. when the democratic majority took over the house of representatives and in the leadup prior to that time, when we were having these speeches made by the presumed new speaker of the house, ms. pelosi, about what we could expect from the new congress. now this is not the first time i've mentioned this. but let's remind you again. to all the members of the house. this is a quote from nancy pelosi in 2006. the american people voted to restore integrity and honesty in washington, d.c. and the democrats sfwoned lead the most honest, most open, and most

ethical congress in history. this was the goal that was set up by the speaker of the house and she has now been serving as speaker of the house for two terms. this was her mantra of what this house would stand for. and without getting off into the weeds of the internal politics of rules committee and stuff like that, which bores people to tears, i'm just talking about this honest, ethical and open about it congress that we were promised. and in another speech, the speaker of the house, the then presumed speaker of the house made the statement that what she was going to do was, if the democrats got to be in charge of this house, they were going to drain the swamp. that there was this culture of

corruption that had created a swamp and that they were going to drain the swamp and expose the corruption. they were going to expose the misdeeds. now, i'm not here to tell you that there weren't misdeeds than brought forward. i'm not sure the democrats had anything to do with exposing them, but they came out through the process at that period of time. and people went to prison. and rightfully so. they broke the law. but i will say that the leadership at that time went forward with those efforts and they reached the unfortunate conclusion that several people went to prison, several people had to leave the congress. but that doesn't mean because you -- because they found issues in the republican party that those are the only issues that were here. and for the last six or eight weeks, i've been trying to say

who is going to look at other issues? i'm not accusing anybody. i'm saying accusations are being made by the press. accusations are being made by other people and they seem to fall on deaf ears. they seem to fall on the deaf ears of the leadership of the democratic majority in this congress and they seem to fall upon the deaf ears of the so-called ethics committee. whose job it is to look into these things. and so we keep raising these issues, wondering what's going on. but now i'm -- i have even more concerns. these concerns are things that i think everybody is going to be concerned about. because if you woke up on sunday morning and you turned on the television, you saw that people are storming the streets of iran. and people are getting killed. because of an election. and that's a pressure point now

in our world that is as big a pressure point as afghanistan or iraq or any other place because it has the potential that nuclear weapons could be involved. because we don't know exactly where iran is on their development of their nuclear weapons and we certainly know they're working on it. they make no bones about it. so we've got a possible nuclear power there where there is a turmoil going on and we're sort of sitting here on -- over here being quiet about it and maybe that's the right thing to do that seems to be the president's -- the president's taking a position of kind of hands off and there certainly is a school that believes that's the right thing to do, i'm not criticizing that. but i am saying that that's the thing that every american and certainly every member of this body should be concerned about. it could be a world-changing event that comes out of ian.

it could be a world-changing event for the negative. so why do i raise this? that very same day that very same day, we heard more from our long-time adversary, the north koreans. you know, i'm ashamed to have to say this, but i'm old enough to remember the end of the korean war, i was just a little kid, but i do remember it. we never made peace with the north koreans, we made an armistice. we decided that we would time out, no more war. they went on their side of the 38th parallel and the south koreans went on our side of the 38th parallel. since that time, one of the great,my rack louse transformations of an area has taken place in south korea. now when you go to south korea, it's a prosperous nation. it has a functioning democratic government.

and the south korean -- korean -- the south koreans have a lot of bragging rights, a lot to be proud of. the north koreans stayed in their same soviet socialist republic a communist regime and basically, with the opings -- exception of building a gigantic army, they accomplished nothing since 1954 or 1956. and -- except to stir up will the of -- a lot of trouble in that area and to develop nuclear weapons and a missile system. now, there are some that think the north koreans are just in this business to sell the weapons to other people to give them something they can trade because they basically are practically without trade resources. but others like me and others fear that the north koreans are just unstable enough that they

can use the weapons in this army to kick open the doors to the second korean war or worse. a regional war. they've done some things that in the past would have created havoc in countries. i mean they fired missiles in the direction of japan two or three times. shot a couple of them over japan. here's a sovereign nation being -- having a missile fired over their territory, they don't know what that missile is carrying or what it can do to their country if it came down. that's as close to an aggressive act, i think, as you can get without hitting somebody. and now, now they have announced to us specifically and to the world in general they're going to test one of their longer range missiles by firing it at hawaii. hawaii.

a state in this union. . they could just as well fire it at texas, or california, or alaska or georgia or maine. a sovereign state of this nation is their -- told us they are going to fire a missile in that direction basically at that state. now, they are pompous and blow hard -- blow hards, but we don't know what they are really going to do. we do know they have tested nuclear weaponsp very recently. so they have nuclear capability. why do i bring these things up in relationpship to the atmosphere that's been created in this house by the failure of leadership to address issues that is part of draining the swamp? it's because i'm going to make the argument that what has gone on in this house and the conversation about -- between

our speaker and the c.i.a., about who is telling the truth and who is not, has a direct influence on these two sunday morning news stories and others. because, yes, we folks sitting around the breakfast table, we get our information about what's going on in the world from the press. but you better hope, having been a trial judge and told juries this for 20 years, you better hope that somebody's getting better information than there is in the press. no offense to the press. but let's face it, they get it wrong every once in a while. and what we depend on is an intelligence system that doesn't get it wrong. we depend on intelligence system that when they come to us and say, this is what our intelligence tells us, we feel like that's fairly reliable news. that we can depend on. we can't disclose it because

it's top secret, but we can depend upon our intelligent professionals to come forward and give us information. now, we have had this issue about enhanced interrogation of prisoners. that's been an issue ongoing throughout the election and now the democrats are in charge it continues to be that we are a torturing nation. and some people label us as torture, and some people label it as enhanced interrogation, whatever you call it there was an issue as to whether or not  the members of the intelligence committee of this house were informed about this when they started to do it. now, those members that have had the opportunity to speak have indicated that -- that which was not top secret that there were briefings on this issue.

the speaker of the house has said they are lying. i was never told about these enhanced interrogations. and she has repeated that until she realized -- which we pointed out on the floor of the house, the -- that lying to the united states congress is a crime. here's the statute. except as otherwise providing this section whoever in any manner within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branches of the government of the united states knowingly and willfully, falsifies, conceals, or covers up by trick, scheme, or device a material fact makes any material, false, fictitious, fraudulent statement or representation or makes or uses any false writing or document

knowing the same to contain materially false or fictitious statements shall be fined under this title imprisoned not more than five years if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism as defined in section 2331, imprisoned not more than eight years or both if the matter relates to an offense under chapter 1009-a, b, 1010, 1017 of section 1591 then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than eight years. without going off into what's in these other sections, what this says under our criminal law of the federal government that if you're lying to anybody -- anybody is lying about a

material fact, there can be nothing more material than the functions of our intelligence committee and our intelligence community. and their relationship and whether or not something happened. and to accuse them of being unreliable and lying is accusing them of a crime. by this accusation, saying they didn't tell the truth, they never briefed me, she's accusing those people who did that -- made that statement that we briefed of committing a crime. it may be a crime that only puts you in prison for five years. gives you a fine. or it could carry -- whatever these sections pertain to, carry it up to eight years. or could be as little as what was the low as four years. i guess five. whatever it is, whatever the

time, that incarceration for that period of time is serious incarceration. this is a serious accusation. these are sear contentions by the speak with her she says they didn't do that, they are lying. they are lying to you. they are lying to the congress. they are lying to the press if they talk to the press. most importantly they are lying to congress. now, that's an issue that we should be concerned about because not just we need it resolved. that's what i keep raising. i have been a judge in this country for 20 years. and its purpose is to resolve issues. now, my question is, who's going to resolve this issue? this issue needs to be resolved. now, why does it need to be resolved? i gave you two examples. north korea even iran -- and iran. two hot spots boiling up. we are getting information, we

should be, i assume we are getting information from our intelligence community. if they are liars, can we trust them? can we put the security of hawaii on the shoulders of our intelligence community and trust their report as to whether or not there is a nuclear warhead on that missile that they have said they are going to fire at hawaii? can we, the speakers' -- speaker's accusations, trust this community? that's the question i think we ought to talk about. once again the 50th time i have probably said this in the last six weeks, what i'm asking for is a place, someone to resolve these issues. and i have raised this resolution necessity. the speaker is the leader. she's the leader of sh house. -- of this house. she needs to resolve this issue. this is putting a crimp in our

intelligence community. it's making -- if i'm an agent and reporting and i get accused of lying, i'm facing criminal prosecution. intelligence at its best is like every other human endeavor, it has its flaws. so, once again failure to show the leadership that it takes to resolve issues causes consequences we can't imagine until they look us in the face. and that's what i wanted to talk about here tonight. we have talked about the issues with mr. rangel and the rangel rule. we have talked issues about other members of this congress. ms. waters, mollohan, murtha, all these guys. i have talked about those issues. i said i have no -- i don't know whether these accusations are true or not but somebody needs to resolve them. if we are draining the swamp, somebody needs to resolve those

issues. if there is a lie going to the congress and we are draining the swamp, somebody needs to drain that part of the swamp that has to do with this lie. that's what this is about. that's all i'm trying to do. i'm raising the question for you, members of this house, and for the american public to think about. what about this culture of corruption? it obviously seems to be here. what about this issue of lying? it needs to be resolved. the security of our nation is at stake. i'm not here by myself and i have been talking way too long without recognizing a really good friend who has come down here just have a friendly vision it about some of these issues -- visit about some of these issues that aren't resolved, my friend phil gingrey of georgia, classmate, and good personal friend. i yield whatever time you may wish to consume. mr. gingrey clog judge carter -- mr. gingrey: judge carter, i appreciate the gentleman from texas, judge carter, yielding

to me. as the gentleman points out, this is a very, very serious time to be on the floor speaking to all of our colleagues on both sides of the aisle. and representative carter and myself and others on our side of the aisle as we bring these concerns to our fellow members, madam speaker, it's not something that we do lightly. it's not something we do lightly. and i hope my colleagues on both sides of the aisle understand that. we have all grown up with the littleation, adages you hear from your parents or maybe at school or church. things like, if you live in a glass house you shouldn't throw rocks. i remember my dad told me one time a story about huey long,

governor of louisiana. and i don't know whether it was in a re-election campaign or maybe his first campaign for governor, there was -- he had a critic, maybe even an opponent in that race, a general hugh johnson, and general hugh johnson was awfully critical of governor huey long and accused him of corruption and that sort of thing. and huey long said to general hugh johnson, something to the effect that don't criticize a speck in my eye if you have a plank in your own. in fact, madam speaker, that may be in proverbs in the bible somewhere as well. maybe that's where governor huey long got that from. but the point is, you know, you're reluctant, aren't we? we are reluctant to bring

criticism against our colleagues knowing that we are not perfect. nobody indeed is except the one true savior. so it's a very serious thing when we come and express concern on the house floor about the action ever our colleagues. but yet we are here tonight. we are obviously here tonight and we are speaking about that. judge carter, madam speaker, started off talking about the seriousness of the consequences of our integrity or lack ever integrity as he talked about -- of integrity as he talked about what happened years ago. and i remember it, too, because we are about the same age in regard to the korean conflict. and then brought us into current time and talked about what's going on in north korea now. what's going on in iran.

that the intelligence that we receive about things that are really bad things that are occurring across the globe, has got to be wisdom and it's got to be honest. and you can't modify those two terms and say, it's conventional wisdom. or it's relative honesty. wisdom and honesty don't have modifiers. it's either wisdom or it's not. it's either honest or truthful or it's not. and so as judge carter talks about the situation with our distinguished speaker of the house of representatives in regard to whether or not what she said about the c.i.a. was honest and truthful, or whether the c.i.a.