honor the memory of a true leader and a public servant, joyce rogers. i urge all members to support this bill and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah reserves. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: did the gentleman yield back? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. ms. norton: i have no further speakers if the gentleman is ready to yield. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chaffetz: mr. speaker, i'd like to yield as much time as he may consume to my colleague from michigan, mike rogers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. rogers: thank you. i'd like to thank the gentlelady from the district of columbia for her help and support. i'd like to thank mr. dingell from michigan. it's great to know that the leadership and statesmanship is still alive in the people's house in washington, d.c. you know, it is fitting, i think, that this great body, this great deliberative body stop along the way of its important business of nation-changing business to recognize some of the greatest acts happen locally.

they're just reflected here and the great things do happen in communities like brighton, michigan, and every other state in this great union. and today is really that day. very, very few times do you get to come to the floor and talk about some great community leader that you have such personal relationship, my mother. and this post office is being named in short for her great work in what is the great community in the great state of michigan. and i will tell you, nobody would be more, i think, shocked and embarrassed that we are doing this today than joyce rogers. as a matter of fact, she would often say that her greatest accomplishment was raising five boys and surviving. but she did more than that. she got involved in the schools, in the local community and her biggest accomplishment, i think, was the fact that she would talk so so many women and getting them -- to so many women and getting them involved in politics and community service. after her funeral service late

last year i can't tell you how many times people came up to me or one of my family members and talked with tears in their eyes about how she would take the time to sit them down as small business women and talk them through to a plan for success or offer them encouragement. one woman said, i know she came to shop at my store three or four times sherks must have bags of my stuff, i know she didn't need any of it. that's the kind of person she was. the kind of person where people of all stripes, of all political philosophies believed she made an impact on a community. and she certainly did that i know she made an impact on five boys who are doing their best to do half as well as she did in life. so to this bodyy, i thank you. to the michigan delegation, for recognizing this wonderful woman, i thank you and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan yields back. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: may i commend the gentleman from michigan for his honor to his mother whom i'm

sure would be particularly proud of him as he should be proud of what we do today in her name. is the gentleman prepared to yield back? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chaffetz: we have no additional speakers, mr. speaker. we'll yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah yields back. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: i have no additional speakers and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from the -- the gentlewoman from the district of columbia yields her time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair -- ms. norton: i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the -- pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from the district of columbia seek recognition? ms. norton: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and agree to the bill, h.r. -- house res. 1513, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1513, resolution congratulating the saratoga race course as it celebrates its 142nd season. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from the district of column yarks ms. norton, and the gentleman from utah, mr. chaffetz, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from the district of columbia. ms. norton: i ask unanimous con send that -- consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may

consume. on behalf of the house committee on oversight and government reform, it is my privilege to rise in support of h.res. 1513. this measure congratulates the saratoga race course on its 142nd season. h.res. 1513 was introduced by our colleague, the gentleman from new york, representative scott murphy, on july 13, 2010. it was referred to the committee on oversight and reform which ordered it favorably by unanimous consent on july 15, 2010. the measure enjoys the support of 60 members of the house. the saratoga race course was opened august 3, 1863, and is the oldest organized sporting venue of any kind in the united states. the course is a top destination for tourists from all over the country and from all over the world. it now oversees one million visitors each year and supports thousands of jobs in saratoga springs and the surrounding communities.

mr. speaker, this venerable race course is one of the world's greatest sporting venues. it has continued many of its original traditions since its founding and s has contributed to the town of -- founding and has contributed to the town of saratoga. let us now take the time to congratulate this historic race course on its 142 nds season -- 14 nds season. i urge my colleagues to -- 142nd season. i urge my colleagues to support it and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chaffetz: i urge myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. chaffetz: the bill brought before the house, the majority gets to direct which bills are brought up and which are not brought up. with all due respect to my colleague, mr. murphy, a great member of congress, this is a wonderful race course, i know there are many americans that enjoy horse racing.

but candidly i struggle to go through this and understand why on the floor of the house of representatives that this seems to rise to the level of recognition. we have so many problems and challenges facing this country, so many issues that we could and should be debating. we should be debating a budget, for instance, which is not being brought before this body. we should be talking about the debt and the deficit and those other things that are going to affect every american life and i recognize that there are times when we need to step up and recognize some truly worthy accomplishments and we honor and name post offices and what not. but when it comes to the world of sport i continue to voice my opposition that this is the time and the place to actually have a, quote-unquote, debate about

whether or not the 142nd season is worthy of recognition in a resolution from the house of representatives. you know, mr. speaker, i'm sure there are some young kids that were here that are going to go back and talk about their time on the house of representatives and they're here in the audience and what they're going to go back and talk to their teachers and they're going to ask, what did you talk about? did you talk about the war on terror? did you talk about the debt? no, they were honoring a race course. a race course. so it's terribly frustrating. there is a way to honor and recognize through members of congress great accomplishments that a new racing season at local race track but honestly i just don't believe this is the way to do it. i'll reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah reserves his time. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i'm

going to responds. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. norton: mr. speaker, if i had a dime for every trivial bill the minority has put on this floor, i could retire as a rich woman. this is not a trivial bill. this is the oldest racing course in the united states, a historic racing course that has been so recognized by the american heritage foundation. it ill-behooves the other side to trivialize a bill by a member of this proportion. i know that my good friend on the other side would not like me to go through and call the roll on bills that would make us laugh. nobody can think that this bill commemorating the oldest -- bill, commemorating the oldest sporting venue in the united

states, would make us laugh. it ill-behooves us not to respect the bills each side puts up, particularly since the minority gets to put up an equal number of such bills that have been requested by their constituents. and we all ought to at least grant one another that privilege without demeaning it. and i'm pleased to yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman who proudly sponsored the bill before us today. i commend him for doing so. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. murphy: thank you. i rise today to congratulate and commend the saratoga springs race course. in just three days it will open its doors and embark on its 142nd consecutive season. the saratoga race course has a critical impact on our local community, contributing both its historic and economic value to upstate new york. saratoga is the oldest

continuously operating thoroughbred race track in the united states and the oldest organized sporting venue in the entire country. the grave yard of champions, as saratoga is so often known, has a rich history of competition in 1973 secretariat was defeated after winning a triple crown. others like gallant fox and man h on h warp have also been -- man-o-war have also been bested there. the race is held each year at the saratoga summer meet and it's the most important thoroughbred event each summer. every year people from across the nation and the world come to experience saratoga's wonderful atmosphere and heart-stopping races. perhaps that's why saratoga has been recognized by "sports illustrated" as one of the world's great sporting venues and has tributed -- contributed to the town of saratoga receiving the first award from

american heritage magazine. this past weekend, they talked about the impact that each season has on the local economy and the community. shop keepers, home makers, hotelers and local restaurants all rely on the income generated from the saratoga season to help promote and grow the economy. and it brings together the community so that they can celebrate this rich racing tradition. the race course is one of the economic backbones not only for saratoga springs but for all of upstate new york and my entire district. racing in saratoga provides for more than 2,500 local jobs in the immediate community and 17,000 jobs in the surrounding communities. each year over 30,000 visitors come each day to the race track and over one million visitors will visit annually. racing will contribute more than $200 million annually to our local economy. this year's season is extra long. we've added a few days and it will be a 40-day season. that extra weekend will create more revenue than usual and

opportunities for tourists to come and caesar toga's wonderful historic track -- saratoga's wonderful -- and see saratoga's historic track and wonderful downtown. in acknowledging the important place that it has in racing history and our economy and to join in my community and my colleagues here in congratulating saratoga on opening its doors this friday nor another great season -- for another great season. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from utah voiced. mr. chaffetz: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. again, mr. speaker, i voice my opposition. the idea and the notion that quhile there have been silly bills passed and offered by the minority is certainly not an argument to continue the status quo. i think the frustration of the american people is we're not dealing with the serious business, we're not offering a budget resolution. we're not debating appropriations bills. we're down here talking about race tracks. that's the frustration. we got people at home right now

watching on c-span because they don't have a job and we're here talking about race courses. seriously. i'll reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah reserves. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: mr. speaker, i grant myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. norton: i did not hear the gentleman rise to voice the same opposition to a resolution that will be voted on in the next series of resolutions by a member from his side of the aisle, mr. wilson of south carolina, and it says, congratulating the university of south carolina game cocks on win the -- winning the 2010 -- no, i will not yet, ncaa division --

if you're going to rise because you think some bill shouldn't be on the floor, you ought to rise all the time. i'm not yielding to you. this is my time. you can take some time, you have plenty of it on your time. as for what we should be devoting our time to, both sides of the aisle give time to resolutions requested by their constituents and we give equal time. that doesn't mean we don't give time to obey important matters and we have given very significant time to very important matters this session which is why it is considered one of the most historic sessions of the congress of the united states. i yield the gentleman from new york, mr. tonko, such time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized. .

mr. tonko: i acknowledge the great work done in bringing into focus the importance of saratoga, its race course and season to the local economy. i commend my colleague, scott murphy, the representative in the neighboring district. while he hosts the track in his district, i know the value to the entire region, to my district economically and certainly to his with this season. it's an important economic engine, for the tourism economy and strengthens our economy and economic recovery is important in whatever measure we can ascertain. today, i want to join my colleagues in celebration of saratoga race course season. it is the oldest organized

sporting venue in the country. since 1863, saratoga race course has been a summer destination enjoyed by many families, racing thuists and individuals from across this nation and indeed around the world. the history in saratoga springs provides visitors with a window into the past of upstate new york. saratoga race course is the home of the oldest major horse race in america. the stakes, the first president of the race course, has been exciting patrons since 1864. travers weekend attracts thousands of individuals and families to upstate new york. each year, that dynamic is felt in the economy and it showcases saratoga's rich horse racing history. thuists who visit are able to

enjoy races. in addition to the region's local food and rich history and culture, i applaud this important venue and the economic engine of upstate new york that it is for the beginning of yet another exciting season of racing. again, i want to commend representative murphy for his work on this resolution. it brings to focus the value added that is instilled into our regional economy with yet another season that will be falling upon us. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from district columbia reserves. the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chaffetz: i yield myself such time as i may consume. my colleagues, these are good members of congress. my point is, we need to raise the bar and start doing some serious work around here. i would agree this is a historic congress because we are doing nothing right now. we are doing nothing. i would agree with you, i will

stand here and have the political guts to vote against the resolutions for the south carolina recognition of the men's college world series. that's ridiculous that we bring it up. i don't care if it's a democrat or republican. if it's in the world of sports. they get enough recognition. and "sports illustrated" recognized it. they have a swimsuit edition and i hope we never see a recognition of that. and we need to debate important issues and not the race track on its 142nd anniversary. we have troops in harm's way. we have yet to bring up a supplemental that the president is asking for. since 1974, when they changed the budget rules, we have not brought before this body a budget resolution to discuss the

outrageous debt and deficit. this body has not brought up appropriation bills. these are the important things we should be doing here. we are commemorating men's baseball and a race track. the democrats have the house, the senate and the presidency and they determine what bills are brought up. and i'll grant you, there are silly bills offered by both sides but it's time to get serious about the people's work. there are people suffering out there. and the frustration is that we waste our time. these people in the audience travel from around the world to see us to what, debate a race track? it's embarrassing. it is an absolute embarrassment. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time.. the gentlewoman from district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: just to indicate for the record and i yield myself such time as i may consume, this

isn't called a historic congress not by the democrats but by historians who have looked at prior congresses, including republican-controlled congresses and indeed, the last or the congress before this side took control, which was especially historic in taking the country down to its knees, leaving it to a new entirely different administration and a different congress to pick the country up. i do commend the gentleman saying he will vote against congressman wilson's bill. but we will be looking to see if he votes -- calf mr. chaffetz: would the gentlewoman yield? ms. norton: we will be looking to see if he votes against all such bills in the future. mr. chaffetz: would the gentlewoman yield? the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlewoman has made clear she doesn't wish to yield. ms. norton: if i yield, i'll yield. and i want to say again that it is quite possible to make a point about what you want to see on the floor without trivializing a bill that is perfectly in order, perfectly respectable, in fact, helps the economy commemorating a venue that helps the economy of another member's district. if you were going to make a point that you think the congress ought to be doing other things, then make the point. but don't do it by putting down other members. that's not the model of civility either side should be offering on this floor. i reserve the balance of my

time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from utah. mr. chaffetz: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i am trivializing it because it is trivial. there are other ways to recognize a race track without taking the time of this body and this country on this floor. i am trivializing and i think that's the proper course. weeks ago, i took a position i would not vote in favor of any sports resolutions. i don't care if they are republican or democrat. the principle is these people receive more than adequate recognition for what they have done. i'm here long enough, i'm just a freshman and didn't create this mess but i'm here to help clean it up. i took a position i'm not going to support any of them. i don't care who offers them. and it's time this body operates on principle. mr. speaker, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: does the gentleman yield back or does he want to keep this going? it's been pointed out to me that the gentleman co-sponsored resolution h. res. 942 commending the real salt lake soccer club for winning the 2009 major league soccer cup. i don't think the gentleman should come to the floor and put down this. mr. chaffetz: take her words down. i move to take her words down.

ms. norton: what word insulted the gentleman? the speaker pro tempore: members will suspend. the woman from district of columbia will take her seat. the clerk will report the words.

the speaker pro tempore: does the the gentlewoman from district of columbia.

ms. norton: i ask unanimous consent. i never called the gentleman dishonest. i did not -- lies in his mouth is an expression that means the gentleman has no business saying what he said. but if it is construed to mean that i'm calling him a liar, i will certainly ask that be stricken from the word. my comments were begun with words about civility here. so i did not intend to call the gentleman dishonest or a liar. the speaker pro tempore: is there an objection? mr. chaffetz: can i reserve the right to object? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized the gentleman is recognized on his reservation. mr. speaker, i just want to be

clear. my intention here is pure. she was asking for civility. i'll take her word for it. we have certain decorum and i ask that we abide by that. to say that a member is being deceitful or a liar is not within the history and the ongoing proceedings of this house. that's all i ask. and i withdraw my reservation. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. without objection, the pending words are withdrawn and the gentlewoman from district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: i appreciate the gentleman has withdrawn his objection and he knows me well. he's on the banking committee and one of my committees and he knows that i don't engage in pointless remarks. the whole import of my objection to issues with the gentleman's resolution on saratoga i wanted

to make sure we respect one another and i certainly respect the gentleman and i certainly would not have meant other wise through my remarks. i have no further speakers. and i'm prepared to yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: -- ms. norton: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah. . mr. chaffetz: let me make the point that, yes, i voted for sports resolutions, i've even co-sponsored resolutions but i came to realize what a waste of time that is. so a number of weeks ago i took the pledge that i was no longer going to participate. there are examples in my past of being a freshman year, i made mistakes, that's one of them. i just believe there are more important, more worthy things that this body ought to be

participating in and probably the next thing we ought to be doing is voting on some things today. so with that i urge my colleagues to vote against house resolution 1513 and i'll yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah yields. the gentlewoman from the district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: i accept the gentleman's change on how he thinks these matters ought to be considered. i certainly don't think we ought to take it out on the member from saratoga and i ask that we approve the resolution that was before us, commemorating the 142 nds anniversary of the saratoga -- 142nd anniversary of the saratoga racing course. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree with the resolution as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3

of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to and without objection the motion to railroad he can is laid on the table. mr. chaffetz: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman asks for the yeas and nays. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 0, proceedings will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. votes will be taken in the following ort. house resolution 1491, h.r. 5604 and house resolution 1516 each

by the yeas and nays. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote. remaining electronic votes will be conducted as five-minute votes. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from iowa, mr. loebsack, to suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1491 on which the yeas andays were ordered. the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1491, resolution congratulating the university of south carolina ga cocks on winning the 2010 ncaa division i world series. the speaker pro tempore: t qution is will the house suspend the rules and agree to the resolution. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or

commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this motion, the yeas are 400, the nays are six, two are recorded as present. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the are resolution is agreed to, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the tion of the gentleman from virginia, mr. perriello to suspend the res and pass h.r. 5604, on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clk will report the title of the bill. the cler h.r. 5604, a bill to rescind amounts authorized for certain surfe transportation programs.

the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill? members ll record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the tional captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representative]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 402, the nays are zero. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rule is suspended, without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from missouri, mr. skelton, to suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1516 on which the yeas and nays were ordered. the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1516, resolution recognizing the 56thnniversary of the end of world war ii, honoring the service members who fought in world war ii and their families

and honoring the service members currently serving in combat operations. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to the resolution? members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas are 408, the nays are zero. 2/3 being in the affirmative, thrules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? mr. polis: mr. speaker, i send to the desk a privileged report from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 15737, resolution waiving a requirement of clause 6-a of rule 13 with respect to consideration of certain resolutions reported from the committee on rules and providing for consideration of motions to suspend the rules. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed.

the house will be in order. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california rise? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 5532 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: would the gentlewoman suspend. for what purpose does does the other the gentlewoman from california rise?

>> i was detained and unable to vote on h.r. 5604. had i been present, i would have voted aye. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to clause 8 roof rule 20. the chair will postponethe rules upon which the votes incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. postponed votes of questions will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. lofgren: mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 5532 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: a bill to amend the immigration and nationality act with respect to adopted alien children.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. members, please take your conversations off the floor. pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from california, ms. lofgren, and the gentleman from texas, mr. smith, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california. ms. lofgren: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. lofgren: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i introduced 5532, the

international adoption harmonization act of 2010 to correct long-standing problems and inconsistencies with respect to adoptions of foreign children by u.s. citizen parents. first, the bill would har mondayize the age requirements and provide needed election built in cases where adoptions take longer. our law contains two age requirements relating to the adoption of foreign children. the rule is that an adoption must be finalized before a child turns 16 in order for the child to qualify for legal status in the united states. for any sibling of such a child, the adoption must be finalized before the sibling's 18th birthday but only if the sibling comes from a country that has not signed the hague convention. the age cutoff from signatory countries is 16. these different requirements create confusion in particular with respect to more stringent

requirements for the signatory countries, the 16-year-old cutoff provision. it fails -- failing to meet the cutoff could have disastrous consequences. the 16-year-old age requirement prevents a small number of foreign children who have been adopted by u.s. citizen parents from obtaining legal status in the united states. if an adoption takes longer than expected, even for reasons outside the parents' control and the deadline is missed even by one day, the child is left with no remedy whatsoever. although the child may be legally adopted by u.s. citizen parents, he or she cannot legally remain with them in the united states. obviously, this is a nonsensical result where one's child has to be removed from the united states or more likely, the individual comes to us for private relief, which we may or may not succeed in granting.

h.r. 5532 recommends -- remedies the problem to require all adoptions be finalized before a child's 18th birthday. this would provide an additional two years by which to complete an adoption before a child is barred from living in the united states or with his or her parents. as adoptions of foreign children are rarely completed beyond a child's 16th birthday, china allows adoptions only up to the age of 14, this bill would affect very few children. but for those few children, this bill is critical. second, h.r. 5532 would har mondayize immunization requirements with respect to international adoptions. current law requires children to have vaccines prior to arrival but there is an exemption if the adopted parents certify that necessary shots will be required. this exemption was required by

congress in 1997 designed to prevent parents to subject their children to numerous immunizations and allow them to immunize them in the united states. this exception applies to children only adopted from countries that are not signatories to the hague convention and does not apply to children from signatory countries. this fixes this discrepancy by expanding the definition to cover children regardless of whether their home country is a signatory to the hague convention. i want to thank the chairman of the judiciary committee, john conyers, ranking member, lamar smith, and representative fortenberry for their support on this measure. i urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves her time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. smith: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without

objection. mr. smith: i co-sponsored this legislation sponsored by chairwoman lofgren and i urge my colleagues to support it. we have a tradition of welcoming new comers and met one million immigrants a year as many as all other countries combined. this continues thisen rossity by ensuring parents who want to open hair hearts and homes to children from around the world are able to do so. the act provides that u.s. citizens can adopt foreign children and have the children considered immediate relatives for immigration purposes if the children are adopted while under the age of 16 years. american families who initiated adoptions of foreign children by their 16th birthdays but were not able to complete the adoptions by that date have sought relief from their representatives in congress and we have responded sthetically. congress has passed private

bills over the years to allow these families to sponsor their adopted children for permanent resident status in the u.s. congress has passed such private bills it makes sense for us to modify the law and provide a broad remedy. this legislation provides that for immigration purposes, adoptions by u.s. parents have to be completed by the age of 18 instead of 16. under the bill, the parents are still obligated to finalize the adoption by the 18th birthday in order to receive immigration benefits for their child. we expect u.s. citizenship to continue to be on guard against possible fraud in the foreign adoption process. this bill accomplishes one more objective by making a technical correction regarding the hague convention on in tra country adoptions. prospective immigrants have to be vaccinated against certain diseases. the law provides an exemption to

the general immunization requirement if one a child is 10 years of age or younger and two, the adoptive parents certify that the child will receive the necessary vaccinations within 30 days of entry into the u.s. this exemption enacted in 198 -- 1997 is designed to ensure that parents don't have to subject their children to sometimes unsafe immunizations in foreign nations. rather they can safely immunize their children in the united states. however, when the hague convention on in tra country adoptions was later adopted this was not extended to the children from signatory countries. the bill extended the exemption to cover children from these countries. i urge my colleagues to support this legislation. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

ms. lofgren: i have no further speakers, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: members and staff are are reminded not to traffic the well while other members are under recognition. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5432 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california seek recognition? ms. lofgren: i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5283 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5283, a bill to help orphans from haiti after the earthquake of 2010. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california, ms. lofgren, and the gentleman,

mr. smith, each will control 20 minutes. ms. lofgren: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. lofgren: i yield myself such time as i may consume. h.r. 5283, the help haiti act of 2010 was introduced by representative jeff fortenberry and is an important bill to help us finish the job we undertook when we rescued 10,000 orphans after the earthquake that hit that couldn't arery earlier this year. six monthings later, it's hard to forget how terrible this disaster was. over 300,000 homes were destroyed or severely damaged. at least 1.5 million people were directly affected by the quake. in terms of human and economic

impact, it's the worst natural disaster ever recorded in the western hemisphere. in response to this disaster, i am proud our country responded quickly and in many different ways. many know about the search and recovery effort the dissemination of food and water, private donations totaling 1.3 -- totaling $1.3 billion, the people who went there to provide critical care and save lives. there are other way ours country provided humanitarian assistance. soon after the earthquake hit, the homeland security immigration service took several steps to provide critical assistance to vulnerable populations in haiti, including creating a humanitarian policy for the immediate evacuation of haitian orphans who had been adopted or were in the process of being adopted by u.s. citizens. these children had been

previously identified as available for intercouldn't arery adoption so they were not at risk for being separated from their families in the aftermath of the earthquake. now in the united states with their adoptive or prospective adoptive american parents, they need one more thing if us. had the earthquake not hit and disrupted the adoption processes in haiti, each would have entered the country as u.s. citizens under current immigration law but because of the emergency procedures used to evacuate the children they must now wait years before they can get permanent residency and years more before they qualify for citizenship. some are in danger of aging out before they get their residency, which would make them ineligible for legal status in this country. h.r. 5283 would simply treat these children as if the earthquake had not happened and they had come to the u.s. under normal procedures. specifically, the bill would allow an adoptive parent or

legal guardian in the united states to apply for permanent residency on behalf of one of the 1,200 haitian orphans brought to the u.s. under the uscis parole policy announced on january 18 and ended in april of this year. i commend representative fortenberry for introducing this bill and committee ranking member lamar smith for his support on this measure. i urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and i are reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. smith: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. smith: at the beginning of this year a devastating earthquake hit haiti claiming 200,000 lives. the department of homeland security quickly acted in the best american tradition.

they allowed orphaned haitian children who were in the middle of adoption proceedings with american parents to quickly enter the u.s. adoption proceedings had not yet been completed when the children were airlifted to the u.s. under the immigration nationality act, the children will have to live with their u.s. adoptive parents for two years before the parents can apply for permanent residence status for the children. during that period, the children must have their temporary parole status each year. as a result, they'll wait an appreciable amount of time in parole status. representative fortenberry was worried about how this would affect the new lives of young children in the u.s. what happens if the adoptive parents die in the parole period? in order to address these concerns and ensure the futures of these haitian orphans, representative fortenberry

introduced the help haiti act of 2010. it allows those brought to the u.s. in the aftermath of the earthquake to receive permanent residencey immediately. this helps future american citizen who was already suffered much but who will have bright futures in the united states. i'm going to yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from nebraska, mr. fortenberry, the sponsor of this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. fortenberry: i thank the gentleman from texas for the time. i'd like to add that as we heard, more than 1,000 haitian orphans already in the process of being adopted by american families prior to the earthquake that struck haiti last january stand today in legal limbo and as mentioned by chairwoman lofgren, in the tragic earthquake aftermath, these orphans were evacuated by the u.s. department of homeland security for humanitarian reasons and with the haitian government's permission to american soil. catastrophic circumstances prompted the evacuation of the

children to the united states before their adoptions could be finalized in haitian court. happily in my home state of nebraska and throughout the united states, many of these haitian orphans were abe to unite with the very american families seeking to adopt them and who are now working to finalize their adoptions in the courts of the united states. due to a technicality in the law, however, these haitian children, upon establishing a legal relationship with their adoptive u.s. parent, will have to wait two years before they become legal permanent residents. as international adoption caseworkers can attest, much can happen to these orphans and their families in two years. so long as their status in the united states remains temporary, these vulnerable children will have few few legal protections. they may not be eligible for critical resources and they may face the risk of being forced to repatriate to haiti if something were to happen to their adoptive families.

to mitigate these risks, the risks that these orphan children from haiti face, i introduced the help haiti adoptees immediately to integrate act of 2010, also known as the help haiti act. this legislation is pe the product of continual dialogue and outreach both to the united states department of homeland security, u.s. citizenship and immigration various and to my republican and democratic colleagues in the house of representatives and the senate. the help haiti act would provide legal certainty of protections to these evacuated haitian orphans by enabling adoptive american families to obtain permanent residency for these children more quickly and more efficiently. had the earthquake not happened, these orphaned haitian children would have gone through the normal process for international adoptions. american families would have finalized the adoptions of these orphans in haitian courts. then upon entering the united states to join their adoptive families, these children would

have automatically received u.s. citizenship. however, the catastrophe disrupted the normal process for international adoption for these children. the help haiti act would help to normalize the immigration procedures that these adopted orphans now face. it would allow adoptive american families to apply legally to obtain permanent legal residency for these vulnerable children and enable them to eventually qualify for u.s. citizenship. this legislation would also help reduce the staff, monetary and other resource demands on the department of homeland security's u.s. citizenship and immigration service. as we all know, mr. speaker, these orphan children have endured great hardships and endured heartbreaking tragedy to come to this country and unite with their american adoptive patients. given the uncertainty and danger that these children have faced we now are in a position

to provide them with a measure of comfort and certainty as to their future with their adopted families here in america. so with that, i'd like to thank chairwoman lofgren for her leadership and work on this bill along with ranking member smith. i appreciate your input and support and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. mr. smith: i yield back as well. ms. lofgren: i have no additional speakers, so i would also be pleased to ask our colleagues to support, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5283? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. excuse me. will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5283s a amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative,

the rules are suspended tpwhirbling is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? >> i move to suspend the rules and pass house resolution 1470. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1470, resolution honoring the life, achievements and distinguished career of chief justice william s. richardson.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott, and the gentleman from hawaii, mr. djou, each will control 20 minutes. the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five days to revise and extend their remarks an include extraneous remarks into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. scott: i ask that my statement be included in the record at this point. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. scott: and i yield to the gentlelady, ms. hirono. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. hirono: i rise in support of house resolution 1470rk recognizing the life, a-- achievements and distinguished career of chief justice william richardson of the hawaiian supreme court. he was born in honolulu in 1919. he was a graduate of a public school, roosevelt high school,

he worked in pineapple canneries to pay his way through the university of hawaii. he then earned a law degree if the uferte of -- the university of cincinnati he served as a platoon lead we are the first filipino infantry regiment in world war ii. in 1956, he was chairman of hawaii's democratic party. he was elected to the office of lieutenant governor in 1962. in 1966, governor john a. burns appointed him as chief justice of the hawaii supreme court. c.j. richardson served on the court for 16 years. c.j. richardson was our nation's first native hawaiian supreme court chief justice, working closely with his fellow justice, c.j. incorporated native hawaiian traditional and customary practices into state law and expanded public rights. in perhaps his most famous case in 1968, c.j. richardson in

essence asked, quote, why should hawaii follow anglo american common law rather than its ancient traditions regarding the use of property? he recalled not being allowed on the beach in front of why key's royal hawaiian hotel as a boy. the historic ruling he wrote incorp. rated hawaiian customs by ensuring public access to the shoreline no hawaii beach could be considered a private beach like on the mainland. under his leadership, the court also established the water rights of people living downstream from privately owned properties that surrounded rivers or streams. . native hawaii ans could gather

traditional resources like plants for their ceremonies. among his proudest achievements was the opening of hawaii's only law school in 1973. he knew that those with the greatest stake in building a more just and equitable society were often denied the opportunity to attend law school because of the high costs. he fought a lengthy battle to create and shape the law school that now proudly bears his name. over the last years, c.j. had an office at the school where he was a regular source of support and inspiration to students and faculty alike. i would like to extend any deep fest condolences to c.j. richardson's sons and daughters, his two sisters, his six

grandchildren and two great-grandchildren. thank you very much for sharing the great c.j. with all of us and i yield back the remainder of my time to mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from hawaii is recognized. mr. djou: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i support house resolution 1470. i thank my colleague from hawaii for her kind words and echo much of the voice on the life of chief justice william s. richardson. this resolution owners the life, achievements and career of william s. richardson the former chief justice, lieutenant governor of the state of hawaii and former chairman of the democratic party of hawaii. chief justice richardson passed away on june 21 of this year and he was one of hawaii's most

influential figures. he played an integral role in shaping hawaii's politics and legal landscape. for myself and family personally, he touched myself and my wife as my wife is a graduate of the william s. richardson school of law and i taught at the law school that bears his name. chief justice richardson was born on december 22, 1919 and referred to himself as just a local boy from hawaii. he graduated from university of hawaii and attended law school at the university of crin cincinnati. he volunteered and served in the u.s. army. he saw combat as a platoon leader and later inducted into the infantry officer candidates' school hall of fame. he returned to hawaii and played a key role in promoting statehood and in 1959, chief justice richardson was one of the most prominent figures that

deserves thanks from all of us on hawaii becoming a state. chief justice richardson was lieutenant governor serving one term from 1962 to 1966 as a democrat. he was the first of ancestry to hold that office. richardson served as chief justice of hawaii's supreme court and during his 16 years as chief justice, made a number of landmark rulings that has shaped hawaii and our nation to this day. most of all, he is much loved by his family. and we will always remember him he is a grandfather. i could always count on him and come by and watch my practice as much as he could. i think that is the legacy all of us want to remember chief justice richardson for. he fought for the establishment of the law school.

his efforts culminated in 1973 establishing the first and only law school in the state of hawaii, the university of hawaii william s. richardson school of law. chief justice richardson shared his wealth of knowledge with students, attorneys and judges and leaves a lasting legacy in our state. mr. speaker and colleagues, this resolution honors this long-time leader and path-breaking american. i urge my colleagues in joining me in support of this resolution and i reserve the balance of my time. aloha -- i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: i just want to thank my two colleagues from hawaii for their bipartisan cooperation on this resolution. and i urge my colleagues to support it. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house success pinned the rules and agree to house res. lution

14770. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the resolution is agreed to. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5566 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: a bill to amend title 18, united states code to prohibit interstate commerce in animal crush videos and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott, and the gentleman from california, mr. gallegly, each will control 20 minutes. mr. scott: i ask unanimous

consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and stepped their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. this legislation addresses a disturbing subject in need of congressional action. in the late 1909's, congress was made aware of videotapes and still photographs depicting small animals being crushed to death. these did he pick shons were referred to as crushed videos and women inflicting torture with high-healed shoes and it appeals to people with a specific sexual fedish and violates state laws. prosecutors have had difficulty obtaining convictions. the face of the persons inflicting the torture were not shown on the videos and the locations, times and dates of the acts could not be

ascertained. the defendants were able to successfully assert as a defense that the states could not identify the persons inflicting the cruelty and could not prove the jurisdiction in which the acts occurred nor could it prove that the actions took place within the statute of limitations. it's difficult enough to find the perpetrators of the underlying acts of cruelty to animals and even after they were found, it was difficult to obtain convictions. congress enacted a new law prohibiting the sell and depiction. it was section 48 of title 18 of the united states code. the motivation for passing the law was to address the sale of crush videos but the statute was written in such a way that it could be read in some circumstances to apply to more mainstream materials such as

hunting and fishing and other activity protected by the first amendment of the constitution. because of this of a broader reading, the united states supreme court in april invalue dated the entire statute in united states versus stevens holding the law was overbroad and violating the first amendment. the court made it clear that it did not rule out the possibility of congress adopting a bill that would hold up under constitutional scrutiny. the subcommittee held a hearing about the decision in may and heard from witnesses that testified that a narrow and legislative approach would likely be constitutional and survive court challenge. the bill before us is much more narrow than the original law. the most important difference is the bill would prohibit the sale of crush videos that are a theme under current law. this would address a key flaw in the original statute because object sen knit is outside the protections of the first amendment where ans of the firs amendment where as some of the

prior activity was protected by the first amendment and more narrow range of drk is narrow range of drk is covered. furthermore, this legislation specifically makes it clear that hunting and fishing videos would not be covered by the prohibition. i commend my colleagues -- my colleague from california, mr. gallegly and mr. peters who worked together to produce this bipartisan bill and i urge my colleagues to support this bill and i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. gallegly: i yield myself such time as i may consume. first of all, i would ask unanimous consent that i have a statement from congressman jim moran from virginia be placed in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. gallegly: mr. chairman, i want to thank chairman conyers and my good friend subcommittee chairman bobby scott and my ranking member lamar smith for working closely with me to draft

the bill that would help put a stop to the sale of animal crush videos while at the same time addressing the first amendment concerns that were raised by the recent supreme court ruling. the district attorney of ventura county, california first brought this issue to my attention back in 1999. he explained that although crush videos were illegal under state laws, the crime was difficult to prosecute because video producers moved their goods through interstate commerce to avoid prosecution. the f.b.i., the u.s. department of education and the u.s. department of justice consider animal cruelty to be one of the early warning signs of potential violent youth. the boston strangeler, unabomber and ted bundy tortured animals before they began to murder people. everyone agrees these disgusting videos must be stopped. my first bill passed the house

in 1999 with a bipartisan vote of 372-42 by unanimous consent in the senate and signed into law by then president bill clinton. the supreme court ruled in april of this year that the 1999 law was too broad but indicated it may uphold a law that is more narrowly drafted. in response to the court's decision, i along with my good friend, gary peters introduced h.r. 1556, the prevention of annual crush videos act of 2010. based on the testimony of the constitutional experts at the may 26 crime subcommittee hearing, i worked with members on both sides of the aisle to craft the legislation that is narrowly focused on prohibiting crush videos rather than proper hibting depiction of animal cruelty. after the 1999 bill became law,

the crush video business virtually disappeared. it has recently re-emerged in the light of the court ruling. quick passage of h.r. 5566 will once again stop this -- these violating videos, revolting videos that depict the torture of animals and killing of defenseless animals. i urge my colleagues to join me in support of h.r. 15 -- 5566 andry serve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: i yield to the gentleman from michigan, mr. peters, who has worked extremely hard on this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. . mr. peters: it's hard to believe that this sort of thing even chists and a new law is needed to prevent it.

animal torture is outrageously disturbing and common decency and morality dictates that those doing it should not be profiting from it. that's why i worked with my colleagues to introduce, the prevention of interstate commerce in animal crush videos act of 2010. this will prevent videos of small animals willing tortured and slowly crushed to death and other animal torture. we respond to a recent holding that a 1999 statute banning crush videos was overbroad and invalid under the first amendment. h.r. 5566 carefully parses and responds to the stephens decision and is written to survive another round of judicial review if challenged after enactment. i appreciate the leadership of my colleagues, representatives

gallegly, moran, and blumenauer, on animal issues generally and specifically on this issue. as co-chairs of the an ma pro-- animal protection caucus of course which i'm a member, representatives moran and gallegly are committed to common sense animal protection. i would like to thank the humane society for their help throughout the drafting process and their tireless protection efforts. i would like to thank chairman conyers, mr. scott and their commitment for advancing this necessary common sense legislation. i urge its passage. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. >> i have an additional speaker. >> i will reserve the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i recognize the gentlelady from ohio, ms. sutton. ms. sutton: i thank the gentleman for his time and his leadership on this important issue. i rise today in strong support and as a co-sponsor for the prevention of interstate commerce in animal crush video ares act and i thank mr. gallegly and mr. peters and all those involved in dealing with this horrific, her risk problem. the recent supreme court decision overturned 10 years of federal law that outlawed animal crush videos. they said that the 1999 law was over-broad and the supreme court also left open an avenue for a more targeted law. so today we make it clear, again, that the intentional crushing, burning, drowning, suffocating, and impaling of animals for profit is beyond sick and it must be stopped. today, with this narrowly

tailored measure, we will end the trade of crush videos, videos where animals are tortured for profit. animal abuse and profiting from these actions are beyond wrong. it's our responsibility to close the loopholes to crack down and end the trade in crush videos and i urge a yes on the prevention of interstate commerce and animal crush videos act to end this unconscionable practice and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. gallegly: i continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. mr. scott: i yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. blumenauer: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this as i appreciate his hard work with the judiciary committee, my friend,

mr. gallegly from california, this is an area, mr. speaker, that i personally think we ought to be able to come together, i supported the original legislation, i found it horrific that we would have people profiting from the most obscene displays of cruelty to animals. i understand the arguments that were made before the supreme court. but i think they made it clear that there was an opportunity to craft it more narrowly and i think the judiciary committee has done a good job in doing so. i am pleased this was one of the areas where congress has been able to come together, people on both sides of the aisle to act quickly in an area that's important to avoid demeaning us all. mr. speaker, cruelty to animals is not something that is just sort of an eso teric issue.

-- esoteric issue. this is something that speaks to the fundamentals of whether our communities will be livable, whether or not we can relate positively to one another. there is study after study that documents that people who are abusive to animals are also people who are likely to be ain busive to their fellow human beings. it is a broad, far-reaching problem we have in our communities still, having worked with the committee in the past on issues that relate to animal fighting, there is a dark subculture here with people who get satisfaction, emotional, sexual, out of seeing animals suffer. it seems to me that it is important for us to respond quickly, to be able to fill the gap. i don't think anybody benefits from this type of activity other than people who profit from it and people who have

their own sadomasochistic satisfaction. i appreciate what the committee has done to meet the court's first amendment concerns and still speak to making sure there are not people who are engaged in these activities and profiting from it. at the time of the original legislation, there were thousands of animal crush videos, for example, on the internet. but after the enactment of the original ban, they essentially disappeared. now, after the supreme court decision, we've seen a resurgence, one that is not in anybody's interest. i hope that we are able to move with dispatch, passing this today and moving on to the senate, to be able to enact this and have one significant, discreet area of progress we can all take tried in. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time.

the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. gallegly: can i ask, you have no other speakers? mr. scott: we have no other speakers. i'll just make a brief closing statement. mr. gallegly: with that, mr. speaker, i ask my colleagues to join us in passing this bill and would yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from california is -- from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank all the people who have spoken and worked hard on this bill to get it in a form which we believe will pass constitutional muster. any time you deal be a subject like this, you have to deal with the first amendment, the last bill didn't quite make it. we believe, based on the testimony we have had today and the testimony in the hearing that this bill will. -- will survive constitutional muster and deal with the trash that's been profited on.

i urge my colleagues to support the bill and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5566 as amended? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed. mr. gallegly: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 and the chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: i move to suspend the rules and pass senate bill 1749 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 1749, an act

to amend title 18, united states code to prohibit the possession or use of cell phones or similar wireless devices by federal prisoners. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott and the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. scott: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the cell phone contraband act of 2010 will address the problem of cell phones being smuggled into prisons by visitors and prison guards. cell phone accessibility has facilitated offenders committing crimes with the use of cell phones. gangs have become more organized because members in prison have cell phone access. s. 1749 amends federal law to make cell phones and similar

devices contraband that federal prisoners are prohibited from possessing. some say cell phone smuggling is directly related to the high cost of calling families. phone companies charge much more for calls made from prison than outside of prison. one collect call made from san quintin prison to oakland, both in california, would cost $5, whereas the same call made from outside the prison would be $2.55. it would even be cheaper if a reliable way for inmates to pay for their own calls. s. 1749 requires the g.a.o. to

study the exorbitant rates as a first step to bringing those costs down to reasonable levels so inmates and families have an easier time staying in touch. although we should not allow prisoners to have access to cell phones while incarcerated, it is appropriate to provide them with telephone service are at reasonable rates in order for them to maintain ties with their families and children. i urge my colleagues to support this important legislation and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. poe: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: the use of illegal cell phones by prisoners is on the rise. in california, news stories report that the number of cell phones confiscated in prisons doubled from 2007 to 2008. in 2008, over 2,800 cell phones were found in california, but more than 2,800 are found just

in the first six months of 2009. the alabama department of corrections found more than 3,000 cell phones in 2009. in fact, there were more cell phones than any other type of contraband found in all of alabama prisons. other state prison systems are experiencing the same increase in number of contraband cell phones. as a result, many states are considering legislation that specifically prohibits prisoners from possessing cell phones in state prisons. s. 1749 takes a step in the same direction at the federal level. s. 1749, the cell phone contraband act of 2010 does two things. first it makes it a crime for federal prisoners to possess cell phones. second it directs the g.a.o. to study the cost and use of landlines and smuggled cell phones in federal and selected state prisons and jails. the legislation is timely, inmates use smuggled cell phones to coordinate drug deals on the outside.

also gang violence and other kimes. all committed outside the prison by use of smuggled cell phones to coordinate this activity that are used in the prison system. last year, an inmate in maryland was accused of using a cell phone to arrange the murder of a witness who had testified against him at trial. in 2008 a condemned murderer on death row in my home state of texas used a smuggled cell phone to threaten a state senator that state senator happened to be the chairman of the criminal justice committee in the state senate. since that time, at least nine death row inmates in texas were found to be in possession of contraband cell phones. i don't personally think inmates should have such open access to cell phones at all in state prisons. to get more data on this issue, s. 1749 directs the accountability office to study the costs and revenues associate twhed operation of land line telephones in the prison system. the study will examine select

state and federal efforts to prevent the smuggling of cell phones and other wireless device into prisons, including efforts made to minimize trafficking of cell phones by prison guards who are the number one source of getting cell phones in the penitentiary and also other officials. news stories report that prison guards are a major means through which cell fobes are smuggled into prisons and prisoners pay anywhere from $3 00 for a normal cell phone and up to $1,000 for a smart phone. a prison guard in california made $100,000 just dealing in cell phones in the penitentiary. it's my hope and expectation that g.a.o. study will help congress and the states in the effort to combat the smuggling of cell phones into the penitentiaries. i support s. 1749. i'm also a co-sponsor of another piece of legislation dealing with this specific issue, h.r. 560, the safe prisons communication act of 2009. this was introduced by my

colleague from the woodlands, texas, area, kevin brady. this would allow state bureau of prisons to request the f.c.c. permit them to use means to jam cell phones within the prison boundary. prisoners would then have no need to use a cell phone. i believe along with this, we should look at mr. brady's bill as a way to prevent use of cell phones in penitentiaries. i urge my colleagues to support s. 1749 and i reserve the balance of my time. . mr. scott: i have no other speakers and i yield back. mr. poe: i yield back. mr. scott: i urge my colleagues to support the legislation and yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the

balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass senate 1749 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. scott: i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1469 as amended. the clerk: h.r. 1469, a bill to amend the national child protection act of 1993 to establish a permanent background check system. pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott and the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, each will control 20 minutes. mr. scott: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the bill under consideration and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized. mr. scott: h.r. 1469, the child protection improvements act of 2009 will permanently authorize the national child safety pilot program. pass nd 2003 as part of the protect act, the national child safety pilot program assists organizations in checking criminals' records of volunteers before placing them asmentors with children. every year, millions of americans generously give their time and energy to volunteer for children across the country. most of these volunteers are interested in being good role models to children, it is important we are able to identify those who seek to do harm. the national child safety pilot program has enabled yithe serving organizations to access the national fingerprint base background check system since 2003. by providing access to the more comprehensive data in the f.b.i.'s data base rather than the in-state background checks,

it would prohibit sex offenders access to children through mentoring programs. 6% of checks have come back showing serious criminal records. in a study of the pilot program it was found 41% of the individuals with criminal history had committed an offense in a state other than one which they were applying to be a volunteer. a state-based search would not provide a complete picture. over 50% of the individuals found to to have had criminal history had falsely indicated on their application form that they did not have a criminal history even when the volunteers knew i even when the volunteers knew their background check was going to be performed. this is a noncontroversial fee-based program that has provided invaluable information to mentoring organizations at no cost to taxpayers. it makes sense now to make the program permanent.

i thank my colleague from california, mr. schiff, for his hard work on this bill and i urge my colleagues to support it. and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. poe: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: children are our greatest resource in this country. as citizens and legislateors, parents and grandparents, it's our job to keep them safe, being vigilant against those who wish to do them haring vigilant against those who wish to do them harm. the child protection improvement act goes a long way towards ensuring our children are not harmed by those that they are told to trust. specifically, this bill extends the child safety pilot program, which provides a background check for volunteer organizations that work with children. the bill also creates a mechanism to replace the pilot program with a permanent background check system that will enroll any organization using the child safety pilot

program. this was created in 2003 under the protect act. the program has been a proven and effective resource for protecting america's children. of of almost 90,000 background checks performed through the pilot program, 6% of volunteer applicants were found to have a criminal history of some concern. these included serious offenses such as sexual abuse of minors, assault, child cruelty, drug offenses and even homicide. since the inception of the child safety pilot program, over 42% of those with criminal histories had convictions in a state other than the state in which they were applying to volunteer. if the volunteer group had performed a search of state records many relevant criminal convictions would have never been identified. access to the national criminal data base is crucial to ensuring thorough background checks of the during a study of over 1,600

applicants, even though volunteers knew they would be subjected to a back ground check, 50% or more lied on their politicses about having a criminal history and did have a record that contained offenses. of the applicants with criminal record, 23% had a different name reflect odd their record than the one uzbekistanned when they had to volunteer. through the pilot program, nonprofit organizations that provide youth-focused care may require background checks from the f.b.i. on applicants or employee positions that entail working with children. the bill stands on the pilot program and allow other organizations to better screen volunteers or employees. child-serving organizations are working hard to provide safe learning and growing environments for our children. that means hiring professional and responsible employees without

h.r. 1469 prov without a criminal history. h.r. 1469 provides a permanent program that will help these groups do just that. h.r. 1469 is supported by the boys and girls clubs of america, the ymca, salvation army, big brothers and big sisters of america and volunteers of america as well as other important organizations. many members of this body are parents and grandparents first and members of congress second and this legislation is critical to keeping america's children safe from predators and other criminals. if one less child becomes a victim of crime because of this program then we have succeeded. with all the information we have, we are able to find out the criminal history of individuals, this act will allow us to do so. i urge my colleagues to join in supporting this important legislation. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia is recognized. mr. scott: mr. speaker, i urge -- i yield such time as he may

consume to the the gentleman from california, former prosecutor and the sponsor of the legislation, mr. schiff. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. schiff: i thank the gentleman for yielding and i thank chairman scott for his leadership on this issue. mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 1469 the child protection improvements act. i first introduced this legislation in 2007 with congressman mike rogers of michigan. it would ensure that any mentoring organization or child-serving nonprofit will be able to obtain a background check of a potential volunteer. about 25 years ago, i began as a volunteer with big brothers, big sisters. big brothers paired me with a young man named david and i have learned as much from david as he ever learned from me. the experience also helped me understand the huge amount of trust we put in volunteers at organizations all around the

country. in the vast majority of cases, the trust is well placed, but unfortunately there are exceptions. for that reason, in 2003, congress created the child safety pilot program to demonstrate the feasibility of allowing youth-serving nonprofits to allow background checks. if they obtain a criminal history, f.b.i. search is the gold standard background check as it cannot be abated by using a fake name and will find convictions from every state. i believe the gold standard is what we should strive for when it comes to protecting children who are put in potentially a vulnerable situation. since 2003, almost 90,000 background checks have been performed through the pilot. in 94% of the cases, the background check returns no serious criminal history. however, in 6% of the cases, a record of some kind was found.

in some cases, an extensive record, which the applicant attempted to conceal. in 23% of the cases, those cases, the applicant gave a name other than the one in their criminal history. applicants were found with convictions for everything from murder to child abuse to sexual assault and frequently those convictions were from out of state so that only an f.b.i. background check would have found them. we have demonstrated the background checks for nonprofits working with children can be conducted quickly, affordbly and accurately. three times since 2003, congress has acted to extend the pilot so that thousands of community organizations all over the country don't lose access to background checks for their volunteers. it's time to create a permanent system, one that will protect children while ensuring the private rights of all volunteers. i thank chairman conyers, one of the original co-sponsors, chairman scott, my colleague, mike rogers and all other

members and urge the members to vote yes. thank you, mr. speaker. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back. the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: we have no further speakers, if the gentleman is prepared to yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. poe: prepared to close. i want to thank chairman scott and chairman conyers and also the gentleman from california, mr. schiff, for sponsoring this legislation and i want to thank mr. schiff for not just this piece of legislation, but other pieces of legislation and his relentless effort as a member of congress to make sure that the greatest resource in our country, children, are protected from child predators. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i thank the gentleman from california for his leadership on this issue. i ask my colleagues to support the bill and yield back the

balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1469 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative -- the gentleman from virginia. mr. scott: i ask for a roll call vote. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman ask for the yeas and nays? the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause rule 8 of rule 20. further proceedings on this motion will be postponed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise?

for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: i ask unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into, the following members may be permitted to address this house, revise and extend their remarks and include therein extraneous material, mr. moran for july 27. ms. miller for today. mr. wolf for july 22 and 23. mr. jones for july 27. and dr. gingrey for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. so ordered. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. scott: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into, the following members may be permitted to address the house for five minutes, revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material. mr. bright, ms. woolsey, mr. maloney, ms. kaptur, mr. defazio. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. under the

speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009 and under a previous order of the house. , the following members are recognized for five minutes each. moran, mr. bright, mr. poe of texas. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: request permission to address the house for five minutes and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. poe: thank you, mr. speaker. the justice department is suing arizona for enforcing federal laws that are already on the books. other states and counties already have enforcement laws like arizona's. prince william county in virginia has laws identical to the arizona 1070. police are allowed to check legal status at any time. police are required to check immigration status if anyone is arrested for anything, including d.u.i. or public drunkenness. according to the county board

chairman, there has been a 37% drop in violent crime in the first two years of enforcement of this law. overall crime in prince william county, virginia, is at a 15-year low. criminal aliens have fled that part of virginia and gone somewhere elsewhere the laws are not enforced. and stewart says there has not been one claim of racial profiling. also, the state of rhode island enforces federal immigration law by executive order. like the sanctuary cities only in reverse. the governor said his law enforcement officers must enforce this federal law. there are more states that follow suit. in missouri, if police want to see your i.d. papers to prove legal status, they are free to ask. sank tue area cities are illegal in missouri and enforce the e-verify system for employers. that's the system set up by the federal government where all employers can check someone's

immigration status. in missouri, you have to be legal to get a driver's license and there is no in-state tuition for illegals at state junior colleges. while the double standard for the justice department and they are suing arizona? why are the feds picking on arizona and not these other states? on the other hand, there are two laws that expressly forbid states from having sanctuary cities. the laws are found in title 8, section 1373 and title 8 section 1644 of the united states code. these statutes say cities may not have policies that prohibit peace officers from communicating with the federal government about a person's immigration status. but there are cities across the country with policies banning their police from calling the federal government to report even criminal illegals. in san francisco, one recent case turned tragic. in 2008, there were three

members of a family that were gunned down by illegals. ramos is a member of the ms-13 narcotic terrorist gang and he is on trial for gunning down one of the members of this family and the two young sons of this family were gunned down, matthew and michael. they were all in a car driving home from a family barbeque after church. they were not gang members but citizens. they were in the wrong place at the wrong time and the accused killer had been previously arrested three times. san francisco police knew he was an illegal ms-13 gang member. the san francisco newspaper reported that the city's sanctuary policy was the reason that authorities never called the federal government. i repeat, the newspaper "the "san francisco chronicle" reported after the shooting that the city's sank tue area policy was the reason that the authorities did not call the

feds. instead of being deported and deported, ramos was released and killed a father and two young brothers because of the federal government's tolerance to cities. the blood is on the hands for those who support the concept of cities. tony's youngest son who survived was that witness. .is the justice department suing san francisco to stop this irresponsible action? no, of course not. instead, they're using taxpayer dollars to sue the state of arizona for enforcing federal laws. arizona is not creating new laws, they're enforcing the federal law under concurrent jurisdiction. the sanctuary cities pose a greater danger to american cities because they give sanctuary to all illegals. they keep aliens from being detained and deported and

sanctuary cities in my opinion operate in violation of the federal government law prohibiting such. but because of politics, the administration is suing arizona for upholding the law and refuses to sue sanctuary cities for violating the law. we hear the rhetoric that illegals do jobs americans won't do now we have an actual situation where arizona is getting sued for doing a job the american government won't do, protecting the security of the country and enforcing the law. and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: ms. woolsey of california. mr. jones of north carolina. mrs. halvorson of illinois. ms. ros-lehtinen of florida. mrs. maloney of new york. mr. burton of indiana. ms. kaptur of ohio. mr. flake of arizona. mr. defazio of oregon. mrs. miller of michigan.

mr. gingrey of georgia. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the gentleman from texas, mr. brady is recognized for 60 inns -- minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. brady: thank you, mr. speaker. america's economy is struggling , and in spite of the spending and promises out of washington a lot of average americans, more than 15 million, are wondering where are the jobs? because they don't have one. this democrat congress and this white house promised a lot to these workers and to the american taxpayer, if they would just give them a blank check if they could just write money like there was no tomorrow, that they, washington, would know best how to get this economy back on track. unfortunately, the reality of

the past 16 months since the stimulus bill passed has unfortunately been much less than what was promised. the obama administration likes to tout they call this the summer of recovery. what you don't see them touting is what the original promises were for that $862 billion stimulus, more than $1 trillion when you add interest to it, the taxpayers will actually have to pay back. the reality is, the obama administration, democrats in washington, failed on all three key promises to the american public about the economy. they said, our first promise is if you pass this stimulus, the unemployment rate would remain below 8%. they said, nonform payroll employment, most workers, would increase to $137.6 million by the end of the year. finally they said, 90% of payroll jobs created would be

in the private sector. well, let's look at the reality. it's been 16 months. a lot of the stimulus has been spent, not all but a lot of it. 16 months later what do we see? obama forecast was supposed to be at this point almost 7.5%. today it's actually 9.5%. that's a little lower than it's been and the reason it's lower, 650,000 americans last month just gave up. gave up looking for work. gave up hope of looking for work. unemployment went down not because the economy is getting better but people are giving up hope they'll get a job. 16 months after this magical stimulus bill was passed. so the actual versus the forecast is very sad. second promise that the stimulus would raise employment, jobs, in america 137 million, this is where

we're at. right here. stagnant as can be. in fact, right now, congressional democrats and the white house, there are -- they are seven million jobs short of where they promised they'd be by the end of the year. seven million jobs short. the economy has never created seven million jobs in six months before. short on promise number two. failed by a wide margin. here i think is the reason. i think this sums up why the stimulus failed, why so many americans are disappointed with the obama administration, why i think the last poll was 13% of americans believe the stimulus helped them in any way. 90% of americans believe this economy is in bad shape and almost 3/4 don't believe it's going to get better any time soon. so much for restoring consumer confidence in america's economy. this is the real reason why. promise number three.

remember, promise number one, below 8%, didn't come close. promise number two, 137 million jobs by the end of the year, seven million short. this is promise number three. 90% of all new jobs created by the stimulus would come from the private sector, not from government. they would come from small businesses back home along main street, the same small businesses and private sector jobs that have always brought america out of a steep recession. here's the actuality. since the stimulus passed 16 months ago, hundreds of billions of dollars of money spent and wasted in america. guess what's happened? the only sector that's grown, the federal government. federal government has added 400,000 government workers. how about the private sector? how about our small businesses and every state across america? lost almost 3.3 million jobs. federal government workers grew. state government came down a little but they pumped a lot o

stimulus money into more government workers. the private sector, the businesses that bring us out of the recession, lost 3.3 million jobs. that's why this economy is so subpar. that's why america is blessed, we are, i think, genetically predisposed to bouncing back from tough economic times. we hate to be in recession. but not this time this recession, unfortunately, is continuing. not from a statistical sense but from a jobs sense. it is 1/3 as strong a recovery as the reagan recovery, we'll talk about that in a minute. here's the reason why. washington has poured all this money into government workers, wasteful stimulus spending. they expect the economy to just jump start, as they said. it'll jump start and consumer confidence will grow. the opposite has happened. consumers have families -- consumers, families, are

holding on to their money. they are frightened by the dangerous levels of debt, they are frightened by $13 trillion of debt america owes in publicly held debt and businesses are frightened these days. they're frightened not by what is one of the secretaries of labor here in washington said, businesses aren't adding jobs because they're waiting to see what government can do for them. businesses aren't adding jobs because they're frightened by what government will do to them. they see an environment in washington prorks posals that dramatically increase taxes, increase regulation, increase the health care costs, increase their energy costs that broaden government, expand regulation in almost every nook and cranny of this economy and they look at that and say, no, you know, we're going to delay rehiring

people we laid off, hiring new ones. we're going to delay that critical investment decision that expansion decision, the decision to buy that new piece of equipment because we don't want to be punished by washington for adding jobs. we don't want to be damaged, punished, if we hire that worker or buy that piece of equipment that uncertainty, unfortunately, is a dragging is an anchor around our economic recession and that uncertainty means that american businesses are holding on to almost $2 trillion. of cash. $2 trillion. normally, enough to, again, start bringing us out of this recession. they're not willing to do that. they're frightened by this white house. they're frightened by washington, d.c. they look at what's happening in congress, these wild proposals, extreme, ideologically driven agendas. they say, we're going to play it safe.

stand pat with our money. consumers are doing it because of their debt. businesses because of the terrible antibusiness, anti-job, growth-killing proposals coming out of washington, d.c. we've seen this before. we've seen this before. economists refer to this phenomena as regime uncertainty. what i would call it is rational expectation. families know america is so deep in debt, someone has to pay it back. you can't tax the wealthy just to pay that back. you could double -- -- doublern's tabblingses in america this year and we'd still run a deficit. you can't tax your way out of the problem. but businesses and families worry that's what's going to happen. middle class and small businesses will end up shouldering a bigger and bigger burden. they know that. rationally, they expect it. so they're holding back. businesses are doing the same. we saw this before as president franklin roosevelt's contradictory and rapidly

shifting economic policy december layed the recovery from the great recession -- the great depression. the u.s. was the last country to recover from the great depression. today, unfortunately, this white house this washington, is following the same formula of spending, of uncertainty, of poor governance, of poor decisions and at times as we saw in the gulf, sheer incompetence. again, businesses look at what they see out of the white house, higher taxes, new laws, the entrepreneurs who are frightened to hire, that's why back to this chart, that's why the federal government is the only sector that's grown. wherever there are government jobs, the only -- they only last as long as the money keeps coming out of your paycheck. but in the private sector, when a business creates a job, when local company hires a worker, buys that new piece of manufacturing equipment, those economic benefits multiply

across the community. unfortunately, private sector in america lost over three million jobs. don't take my word for it. the national federation of independent businesses recently surveyed a number of their small business owners. here's what they said. the u.s. economy faces hurricane force headwinds and the government is at the center of the storm, making an economic recovery very difficult. this is small businesses. by the way, i'm congressman kevin brady, i represent the eighth district of texas. it is a great area, 11 counties from the louisiana border through east texas, down to montgomery county and the woodlands, i'm the fourth senior republican on the ways and means committee the ranking republican on the trades subcommittee and the ranking house republican on the joint economic committee. we've been studying these businesses and these economic numbers for some time. what the nfib, the independent businesses said, in addition, either policymakers have no idea how to help the economy or

they are intentionally committing to unsustainable expenditure growth and deficits so large there'll be no alternative but to raise taxes a slow suicide for a dynamic economy, just what i said, the national federation of independent businesses confirmed that it is the hurricane force winds coming out of washington, d.c. that's holding this economy back. . the president is selling wealth redistribution and the need for more taxes. what should ordinary citizens and small business owners expect from all this? a growing and more dynamic economy? not likely. taxing success is a terrible path to growth and real investment. and adding to the misery massive government deficits threatens future capital availability for

the private sector so our independent businesses along main street say what those of us in business have said, it is washington that is holding back this economic recovery and the white house holding back this economic recovery with this extreme agenda. before i yield in a moment to another congressman from texas who serves on the joint economic committee, dr. burgess, i want to say this quote, while the nfib represents tense of thousands of independent businesses, business round table represents every business sector, selling and competing around the world to sell america as well and this is what the business round table just said. many regulations both existing and proposed exacerbate the uncertainty traded by today's

volatile environment. everything has an impact. often that impact is negative. most businesses can cope with each new regulation, but the crushing impact on the economy is enormous and often harmful and with the massive new health care law, financial reform legislation looming companies are more worried than ever about the impacting the legislation will have on their bottom line not knowing what to expect. businesses are acting to forestall any negative impact. they are squelching economic growth as companies are forced to freeze investments and hiring until they understand how they will be affected by these new mandates. so despite hundreds of billions of dollars in spending, all this government intervention and expansion of government,

american economy is stalled because those job creators who bring us out of the recession are frightened by washington and these policies. they don't want to be punished and holding on to almost $2 trillion of cash and that capital is what would fuel our economic recovery. so washington and the white house is the single largest obstacle to america getting back on its economic feet. and joining me tonight is a congressman from texas, serves on the energy and commerce committee, one of the leading republicans there and serves with me on the joint economic committee, focuses not just on health care but on businesses along main steet. and i would yield to the honorable congressman from texas in the forth worth area, dr. michael burgess. mr. burgess: you know, i believe in the american economy. i believe in the ability of

american people to recover in this economy. i don't think that the united states house of representatives, the senate and the white house combined can keep this economy down forever. but they can give it a good shot at keeping it down longer than it needs to be. and we all know because of the prolonged effect of joblessness the economy is having a tougher time recovering. and the gentleman said it so well, the reason that small and medium-sized business is reluctant to add a job right now and you are seeing the same thing, some things look like they are picking up a little bit. parking lots are a little fuller. but talk to a small business person and ask them are you doing a little bit better? maybe a little bit. do you think you might add a job soon or take someone else on to your business? i might, but i don't know what you are going to do to me in

this health care bill. i have no idea what this financial regulatory scheme you have passed is going to do to me. i can't afford the tax increases you are going to be delivering at the end of this year. no. i don't think i can add a job. and if you further do something with energy prices, i know that the future is just too uncertain. i'm doing ok, but i'm not going to be adding any jobs. that may be one or two jobs at a single business, thrift shopping center but across the larger economy, those are the jobs that should be fueling our recovery. and the activities here in washington, d.c. are what is having the dampening effect on that. today's "wall street journal" had an interesting lead editorial on the editorial page appropriately titled "stimulating employment." a novel approach as to how you might attack problems of the

economy. according to the "wall street journal" today, they talked about how the president typically invited to appear at the rose garden to trumpet success. yesterday, we saw what may have been a first. president obama introduced three americans, auto worker and women in real steet who have been out of work for so long they underscore the failure of his entire economic program. they said, president obama conceded that 18 months after thinks stimulus, there are still five job seekers for every job opening and 2.5 million americans will run out of unemployment benefits. vice president biden was hailing the stimulus for creating three million jobs. this week, the white house says we need even more stimulus in the form of jobless checks to make up for the original jobs that his original stimulus did

not create. we hear over and over and over again how it is the republicans that are obstructing the extension of unemployment insurance benefits. but there is still money left in that stimulus bill since the stimulus has been such a failure in creating jobs and the money is available to pay for those unemployment benefits, that seems like a reasonable suggestion. and i get calls all day long, yeah, that is a reasonable suggestion. why don't we proceed with that? instead, we continue to pass bill where this money is going to be added to the deficit. if the money wasn't just sitting there languishing in the stimulus bill, then maybe you could see their point, but relate particularically, the money is there and should be used to offset the extension of unemployment benefits, because one thing that we do know, there is a consequence for borrowing these vast sums of money. and we know that expanding the deficit to the $1.6 trillion

that we are going to see this year is ultimately money that is going to have to be borrowed and because that money will have to be borrowed, it could raise the interest rates and subsequently have an effect on inflation. so why not do the sensible thing and spend the money that you have already allocated in the stimulus bill which isn't doing any good anyway, if you need to extend unemployment insurance, that would be the correct place to do it. i have some other points but i yield back and hear your thoughts on that. mr. brady: i would like to follow up on your point on unemployment benefits. the republicans support people down on their luck. there have been extension after extension. our point and our principle in this whole issue has been don't make matters worse by adding to the debt, by adding to the uncertainty to the economy, by frightening consumers to save more of their money. our point is, white house,

congressional democrats, you haven't even spent one half of that stimulus money yet. some of it has been allocated but you nearly have half of it left. rather than what you wasted it on, i want to talk about some of those on creating jobs, why don't we pay for the unemployment benefits with that money and let's start stimulating private sector jobs. we have lost more than three million. and dr. burgess, people say back home, they look at some of the wildly exaggerated claims from the stimulus. remember all the phantom congressional districts that this white house actually made up districts that don't exist today and credited them with certain job creation. some of the examples of job creation were just wild, $1 million for each pair of boots. but looking at some of them, you

know, stimulus money, $71,000, university of wake forest in taxpayer to study cocaine addition on monkeys. $330,000 to conduct a study on the relationship between drinking malt liquor beer and using marijuana. 100 people were paid $45 or will be paid $45 for three weeks by three weeks to drink malt liquor to compare it with marijuana. half a million to study the genetic differences between queen and worker ants. $50,000 for a hand puppet grants in the midwest. bloomington, indiana, $40,000 for 10 solar panel trash compactor. they said -- for a homeless

program. they said we didn't ask for this money and we don't have a homeless problem. and the response was, well, create. i don't know if that means creating homeless people to use the grant but on the stimulus dollars, florida, for example, used $8 million of their funds to pay off people who have already completed work. they used it to pay their bills. national science foundation gave funding to north carolina university for a dance draw, which involves students attaching myself to their chests and wrists to form shapes on a computer. when the president says we need help for the unemployed, republicans agree, we want to stop wasting stimulus money. help people who actually need help. stop playing politics.

is studying myself, malt liquor beer more important than helping people down on their luck? we don't think so. it shouldn't be making it tougher for consumers. i just wanted to expand on that point because i think it's a critical one for people watching tonight who are wondering if congress is functioning at all or listening at all. i don't think this congress is. i would yield back to you, dr. burgess. mr. burgess: the "wall street journal" editorial talks about the five applicants for every job that is available. and you know, we had in our committee, in energy commerce, we had a hearing on the oil spill down in the gulf of mexico. and once again, it came up about the issue of the secretary of interior proposing a moratorium on drilling in the gulf of mexico. mexico. here, we kind of reversed the