appropriations side. three of those many members who are particularly interested in uspto have co-sponsored this legislation. one of them is patrick murphy of pennsylvania. mr. murphy is here to speak on the legislation. here too are chairman conyers and chairman moran. chairman conyers on the committee and chairman moran, a gished -- distinguished member of the appropriations committee. they've been at the forefront of fighting for uspto so they can reduce the backlog of what we speak today. mr. murphy is a young member, i'm pleased he's a distinguished member of the commerce, science subcommittee. he has take an particular interest in this issue. he's becoming very knowledgeable about it and has been in the forefront of moving this legislation that would help them. so it's my pleasure to recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. murphy, for two minutes.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. speaker, thank you, chairman mollohan, i appreciate your leadership on this issue and allowing me to partner with you on this important piece of legislation. mr. speaker, we need to continue to get our economy back on the right track. this bill is about boosting american technology and innovation. it's about making things in america again. right now, at an office building outside of washington, d.c., over a million patent applications sit gathering dust. hundreds of thousands have yet to be looked at for the first time. those applications could be the next iphone, inext netbook or the next google. but the agency tasked with reviewing those applications can't keep up so they sit and they sit, often for years. in fact, the average time that it takes a patent to be approved is about 30 months.

but when you consider that today technologies often become obsolete within 18 months or less, it is clear that a process that takes two 1/2 years is simply two long and it hurts our competitiveness. those applications at the u.s. patent and trade office, or uspto, represents the great it's the country has to offer in terms of new ideas and new technologies. they contain any number of breakthroughs that help propel our economy out of the recession, expand small business and create new jobs. they could be the key to helping our nation maintain its technological edge globally. patent activity among our biggest competitors like china, india, and south korea have shown exponential growth but this bill is one step from

providing uspto the resources necessary to keep pace with the flow of innovation and ensure american businesses and workers can compete globally. it is set with the reduction of spending -- it is justify set with the reduction in spending in the census bureau. we need to make sure the uspto can hire necessary patent examiners, install up to date patent technology and make other changes necessary to get at this backlog. this is an issue of critical importance for our economy and the job market. i encourage my colleagues to join me in supporting this common sense and paid for legislation. i know that manufacturers in bucks county, pennsylvania, and across the country care about it. i want to thank you again for the leadership of chairman mollohan and i reserve the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from virginia is

recognized. >> i have no more speakers, i yield back. mr. mollohan: we have -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from west virginia is recognized. mr. mollohan: we have no further speakers and we yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5874? 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 north carolina rise? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 5875. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5875, a bill making emergency supplemental appropriations for border security for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2010, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore:

pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from north carolina, mr. price, and the gentleman from kentucky, mr. rogers, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. mr. price: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on h.r. 5875. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. price: and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. price: this bill provides a total of $701 million to support high priority homeland security and justice programs to enhance security along the southwest border. violence on the mexican side is intensifying due to turf battles among murderous transnational groups competing for drug and human trafficking. this bill is largely

uncontroversial. it simply reproposes funding the house already approved as part of the war disaster supplemental bill on july 21. these funds were stripped by the senate, leaving only funding for the wars, the disaster relief fund and the haiti earthquake relief. this funding is required now to improve security on our border and in our border communities. i want to thank the dedicated members from the southwest border region who have kept the focus on this issue and are responsible for bringing us here today. we'll hear from a good number of these members tonight. i want to especially thank gabby giffords and cyril rodriguez a member of our subcommittee, who is a tireless advocate. alan mollohan helped shape the department of justice items in the bill and many others helped

substantially, chet edwards, harry teague, henry cuellar, susan davis and green gene among others. briefly, -- and gene green among others. the bill would fund 1,200 new border patrol agents to su -- to sustain the numbers on the border and build up for when the national guard is removed next year. 5,000 new officers at ports of entry as customs and immigration fee funding continues to fall. the bill includes funding for integrity programs to ensure c.b.t. personnel operate at the high standards we expect and to combat efforts by the cartels to corrupt c.b.p. personnel. the bill would fund three new forward operating bases and better tactical communications to allow the border patrol to operate close to the borders

and close gaps that could be exploited by smugglers. it would establish four mu border security task forces on the border and build up a permanent ice presence in joint counterdrug efforts in the region as well as provide a surge in i.c.e.'s criminal alien removal efforts. it would would add money for state and local joint efforts on the border and add two additional predator unmanned systems on the border. and it provides $201 million for justice department staffing to surge agents and u.s. attorneys to high crime areas in the region and provide more robust assistance to mexican law enforcement authority and better handle criminal aliens referred by the department of homeland security. on june 22 of this year, the president requested a $600

billion border security supplemental. offsetting $100 million of those funds and offsetting the rest as emergency -- and labeling the others emergency. this bill come plies with that request. it is partly paid for by cuts in other departments. we consider our challenges on the southwest border as important as our military's work to secure afghanistan from the taliban or to promote stability in iraq. some would argue that the southwest border mission is more important. that's why this president, like past presidents, has requested the funding under an emergency designation. i know the minority has agreed with this point of view repeatedly in the past and i hope we can count on their support now. mr. speaker, this bill will help us counter the pressures

on our law enforcement agencies and border communities and i urge my colleagues to adopt it and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: mr. speaker, i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rogers: let me start, mr. speaker, by saying that i take a back seat to no one on border security. i read the intelligence reports the briefings, i have been on this subcommittee since it started in 2003, chaired it for its first years. now rank on the committee, subcommittee. have led and supported the robust funding for the coast

guard, c.p.b., i.c.e., d.o.j., all the other law enforcement agencies, even the local ones, i've implored, in fact practically begged the white house and the democrat majority to recognize the spillover violence from this heinous drug war raging on think border with mexico. i have even pushed for a new joint command along the southwest border for all of the american agencies. and finally, i've been first in line calling for a serious, sustained approach to breaking the backs of the cartels and enforcing our immigration laws. unfortunately, mr. speaker, this bill is not a serious, sustained response. rather, this is little more than a cynical, knee-jerk

political ploy. i have three concerns with this bill. this suspension bill is not paid for. at a time of record deficit spending, why can't we at least attempt to find the prudent offsets necessary to address our nation's border security needs. $600 million of this money is -- will be borrowed money. is this so important that we will ask our children and our grandchildren to pay for it? secondly this bill circumvents regular order. these expenditures should be considered as part of the 2011 homeland security bill. the very same process that was derailed by the majority only

yesterday. when the homeland bill was to be considered by the full committee. and 10 minutes before we were to meet, they canceled the meeting. and thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, and disappointingly, this bill is woefully inadequate and the wrong mix of security, leaving gaping holes at the judiciary, c.p.b. and the coast garr. if we're going to do -- coast guard. if we're going to do this, let's do it right. $500 million out of this bill's $700 million price tag, as i said before is borrowed money. so in many ways, this bill is addressing one urgent security issue and creating another. while border security is indeed a priority, our skyrocketing debt and continued deficit

spending have the makings of a genuine national security crisis. we can no longer ignore our debt. and continue to elects rely -- recklessly spend, call everything an emergency and simply hope it will go away. we have to make the tough, disciplined decisions at every level and on every issue, these border security enhancements can and should be paid for by way of responsible offsets. more to the point, why can't we consider these obvious funding needs as part of the 2011 department of homeland security appropriations bill? that's where it belongs. the majority took six months to consider a true emergency, funding our troops at war. and sent that bill through a

tangled, po litized labyrinth. the white house only woke up to this drug violence on the border in june. with a haphazard request. which begs the question, where is the administration's and democrat majority's commitment to security? . yesterday, the democrat majority canceled the markup of the homeland security bill, where this belongs, just 10 minutes before it was scheduled to begin. and for what? so we could turn to this suspension bill. borrow a half a billion dollars and then ignore all of the other vital homeland security issues for the coming year. addressing the critical needs our nation's aviation security,

immigration enforcement, disaster response and cybersecurity are now left dead in the water with little hope of resurrection. or was the last-minute cancellation for some reason, like the fact that arizona's new tough immigration law is in the midst of a contentious lawsuit. the murderous drug war along our border with mexico demands serious solutions, not reckless spending in the middle of the night after no preparation or no hearings, a flawed process and worst of all, political games. as it were, i was prepared to offer yesterday at the full committee markup at our annual bill, i was prepared to offer a

responsible, completely offset amendment that would have achieved this goal and would have included many of chairman obey's ideas and the minority was prepared to take a strong stand in advance of the arizona immigration enforcement law, a law that simply makes being illegal present in the united states against the arizona law. sadly, thanks to the tactics of the democrat majority, we don't get a chance to offer, let alone debate these sound amendments. so, let's get our border security right. let's provide the right mix of enforcement resources to combat the ruthless drug cartels, but let's do so through the regular order and in a fiscally responsible way. this bill, just like president obama's flawed request, neglects

our countersmuggling needs in the source and transit zones, fails to fully address aerial surveillance shortfalls and ignores the judicial resources required to follow through on enforcement actions. if only the democratic majority would be willing to take up the 2011 homeland security department and commerce and justice department appropriations bills, we could consider and debate the improvement of our border security in such a way that all of these issues could be addressed and paid for without passing along the bill to our kids and grandkids. sadly, that's not the case here tonight. so i have grave reservations about this bill, mr. speaker, as you may have noticed, and this process. while i wholeheartedly believe

we can and must do more to shore up our porous border, we can do it far better and be willing to pay for it. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina. mr. price: mr. speaker, i would like to yield two minutes to an outstanding member of our subcommittee, mr. rodriguez of texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rodriguez: i rise in support in support of this bill and i thank chairman price for his work on these issues. the chairman has joined me on the board. i represent more border than anybody else in the congress, 785 miles and we have had the opportunity to tour all the way from texas to san diego, including the northern border. and i want to thank him for his

bringing forth this piece of legislation. let me just indicate that this is a major piece of legislation that's critical to making sure that we secure or border. if anything is important, it's to make sure that this country remains secure. earlier this month, the house passed a supplemental appropriation bill that continued to fund our operations both in iraq and afghanistan and included $701 million in much needed border security funding. this is the funding that our men and women on the border are asking for and the need to get the job done. we all know that violence in mexico has escalated, and we need to ensure that u.s. borders are not left vulnerable. we were disappointed when the senate did not include the border funding in the version of the supplemental appropriation bill. so earlier this week, i was joined by congressman by giffords from arizona in the

writing a letter to our leadership to asking them on the emergency border funding for this particular piece of legislation. we could not let the senate gridlock or sacrifice our ability to keep the border secure. last night, we were pleased to join chairman price in co-sponsoring the bill that would provide these resources for the border. the bill is paid for and not a penny will be borrowed. this bill will target funds just as the previous house passed the supplemental bill. it includes additional border patrol people that we need on the border, additional officers right at the ports of entry. i ask support for this piece of legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: reserves. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from north carolina.

mr. price: i yield two minutes to an jute standing chairman of our authorizing chairman of our subcommittee mr. cuellar. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cuellar: we need to provide the funding to our border and i thank the members who have worked here. i live on the border. my family lives on the border and my brothers are on the border, so i understand what has been happening on the border for the last 54 years. and woy have to say this is the largest infusion of resources that the border has gotten. 1,2,000 border patrol, i.c.e. agents, f.b.i., to make sure we have the right mixture of technology, including u.a.v.'s and put eyes in the sky an eyese sure that we get other

communications to do this. this will allow us to make sure we stop the drugs and make sure we secure the border. and this is one point that's very important. if we secure the border, we secure the rest of the united states. and this is why this effort is so important. so chairman price and ranking member, i thank you for all the work you have done. and again, members, i ask you to support this very important funding for the security of our nation. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky. mr. rogers: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina. mr. price: i yield two minutes to another outstanding member who has worked tirelessly, mr. teague of arizona. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. teague: thank you for the work you have done. mr. speaker, i rise tonight in support of the supplemental appropriation bill to secure our border now.

a drug war is being waged threatening communities, families and our livelihoods in border states and while the violence escalates, congress seems content to ignore the issue. the drug war is an immediate threat and calls for immediate action. it is deeply troubling that the senate failed to take this opportunity to protect our national security and secure our border. that's why i'm proud to bring this bill to secure or borders to the floor tonight. deploying our national guard troops to the border is critical, but we need a sustained presence in border patrol to protect our citizens. this bill provides additional border patrol agents and resources for local law enforcement agencies located near the border through the important programs like operation stone garden. something important this bill will fund will add to our border

patrol. they will get our agents on the ground where they can protect our citizens 24 hours a day, seven days a week. currently to protect americans, border patrol agents must travel 85 miles from their station in new mexico. this costs the border patrol agents hours in travel time before they begin their work. this bill will get agents on the line protecting american citizens. the safety of our communities and our country, it is too important a subject to partisan politics. the house has passed this legislation and i urge my colleagues to stand up for our national security once more. vote yes to protect the communities along the southern border. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina. mr. price: could you tell me how much time we have remaining?

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina has 10 minutes remaining. mr. price: i thank the speaker and i yield two minutes to ms. giffords of arizona, who is a sponsor of this bill and has also worked with citizens in her region, ever since she came to this congress, to secure the border and make certain that the citizens of arizona and the border region were safe and protected. yield her two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. giffords: the last couple of days have been difficult for me because i represent the most pourous part of the u.s.-mexico border and i think about rob cents an arizona ranger whose family ramped on their land before arizona achieved statehood. on march 27, rob cents was murdered on his land. murdered on his land and that

was in his family's hands for over 500 years ago. the border patrol apprehended over 500,000 illegal immigrants in my community. last year, 200 42,000 illegal immigrants were then apprehended in the tucson border patrol and year to date 180,000 patrol and year to date 180,000 illegal immigrants apprehended in the tucson sector. another record, 1.2 million pounds of marijuana seized in the tucson sector. owes those of you saying that this is not critical, keeping americans safe whether you live on the border is outrageous. these federal government needs to step up and take responsibility now and stop pointing fingers and blaming other people. for those senators who voted no last week, they said no to those ranchers. they said no to the national

guard troops who are being deployed next week not in a vacuum with resources coming in hyped them and no to law enforcement officials, those not going to be receiving grants. i think, mr. chairman, this is outrageous that the federal government and the united states congress, democrats and republicans working together are not fixing this problem, because in arizona, in my sector with my constituents, this is our oil spill crisis but this crisis hasn't been going on for a couple of months but for years and years. and now, tonight, is our opportunity to step up and finally do something about it. mr. chairman, you can only understand how outrageous i find this debate to be. and i urge my members to support this bill. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina. mr. price: i would like to yield myself such time as i might

consume to respond to some of the pertinent questions raised by our ranking member. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. price: the gentleman has raised a series of questions which deserve answers and i will briefly attempt to provide those answers. and then we will perhaps bring this debate to a close. the gentleman asks why this bill in this form at this point. the answer to that is very simple, and that is, it was only this week that the senate stripped these provisions from the supplemental appropriations bill. up until this point, our hope and expectation was that the senate would find a way to pass these border security provisions or some major portion of them in the appropriations bill. because it did not happen, we find ourselves in this position tonight offering those provisions as a freestanding

bill. the gentleman asks does this supplant the regular bill? absolutely not. we work cooperatively in putting together the 2011 homeland security bill. and that addresses homeland security in serious ways. it builds on the work we have done in the last number of years to fortify that border, to equip those who are protecting the border and have adequate personnel at the border. the 2011 bill is going to address these matters in a serious way. and we still hope and expect to send that bill to the president this fall. . this, however is an emergency supplemental which addresses urgent needs that shouldn't have to wait for that regular bill. but it absolutely takes nothing away from the regular 2011

bill. the gentleman made some assertions as to what might have happened had the markup gone forward on schedule yesterday. the fact is, neither of us knows exactly what would have been offered, much less how the votes might have gone. i do want to address one very serious matter, though, and that is the question of offsets, the question of where this bill fits in the overall budget picture. as i said in my opening statement, when the president requested a $600 million border security supplemental on june 22, he proposed the offsetting of $100 million of these funds and designated the rest as an emergency this bill is consistent with that request. it funds $500 million as an emergency designation and justify sets $201 million as balances from d.o.j.

this is entirely consistent with past practice under the leader -- leadership of both parties. when mr. rogers was chairman of the appropriations committee and republicans were in charge of this body, congress passed three emergency spending billers in southwest border and none were offset. of these bills, the administration in fact requested only one as an emergency. the other two bills contained border security funding added by republican controlled congress, not even requested by the administration, and congressional republicans unilaterally deemed this as morning funding. the situation on the border necessitates immediate action, makes it a true emergency. why would the minority or anybody else consider this a less emergent priority than fighting the taliban or stabilizing iraq? no questions are ever raised about the emergency status of those funds. these are missions that are

much more expensive, i might add. and finally, let me quote a letter we got from mr. rogers, mr. lewis and other leading republican members a mere week ago. this has to do with the kind of enforcement efforts that might be undertake on the southwest border, i'm quoting from that letter. while cross-border criminal activity is not a new phenomena, it has escalated into an unquestionably clear and present threat to the security of the united states. therefore, we believe it is necessary to pursue any and all means of addressing this threat within the parameters of the law. mr. speaker, i submit that that is exactly what our supplemental emergency appropriations bill does and for that reason, i urge its adoption. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from kentucky is recognized. mr. rogers: i yield myself such time as i may consume.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognize. mr. rogers: the gentleman is correct, years ago, when we requested and put in the bill funding for the border, and some of it was emergency, so-called emergency spending but that was at a time when we did not have a one trillion, four hundred billion dollar annual deficit. times for different. we are in a monetary crisis in the country now. and so that's the reason that i believe now is not the time to use what's called emergency money, which means borrowed money, it means not paying for it. this is not the time to do that. mr. chairman, the drug cartels have demonstrated that they will not relent, so long as there is a viable way to smuggle their drugs and money,

blood money, across our border. to take this threat lightly or to address it with only half-baked ideas brought up under suspension at night without any preparation will only, i think, get us further into the morass. and the last thing we want to do is to cause trouble for president calderon as the drug war reaches its boiling point because he has been so diligent in his efforts and we must not rush into something that does not have their, president calderon's complete understanding and agreement. that means we must get our border security right through serious solutions, having thought through them carefully, and working with our allies in

the matter, rather than reckless spending and flawed political gimmicks like this bill is. it's not paid for. it's incomplete. and it's absolutely no substitute for the urgently needed fiscal 2011 homeland security appropriations bill. now, as to this funding, and the urgent need that it is said to represent, the congressional budget office told me that none, none of this bill's funding will outlay in this fiscal year. this money will not be used in this year. according to the c.b.o. what that tells me is that this bill is really padding the fiscal 2011 regular bill process. but where is our fiscal 2011 bill? it's almost august. we're going on recess for six

weeks and there's no bill that this congress has produced that the democrat majority has put before us to fund the department a few days later. where is the bill? we had it scheduled to be heard in the full committee yesterday and 10 minutes before we were to convene and mark up the fiscal 2011 bill which could have included moneys like this in the regular process, they canceled the hearing, pulled the rug out. we're not worried, they apparently said, about the nation's security. where is the bill? this is not a substitute for the regular department bill that funds everything. not just the border war. bypassing regular order, throwing more money at the border, is not responsible leadership on our nation's security needs.

but mr. speaker, it's not too late. the democrat majority can still make up for all the lost time and the inaction this year and move the d.h.s. fiscal 2011 and c.j.s. appropriations bills to properly address our border security and enforcement needs. that's what i would have proposed, had we actually convened our markup yesterday, move the fiscal 2011 bill through regular order and had a genuine and thoughtful debate on our security priorities. somehow, i don't think i'm going to get that chance. so i caution members to consider this bill carefully and urge the democrat majority to move the regular appropriations bills through regular order with all due haste. mr. chairman, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from north carolina is recognized.

mr. price: mr. speaker, i believe we're ready to move to a vote. i appreciate the comments of the gentleman from kentucky and of course share his hope that we will in reasonably short order have progress to report on the fiscal 2011 homeland security bill. we have that bill assembled, we have put it through the subcommittee process and we plan to proceed with it in due course. i stress, this bill tonight is in no way a substitute for that bill this bill tonight is not new. this bill was passed by this house. the exact language, the exact provisions, were passed by this house on july 1. as part of a supplemental propings bill. and the only reason it is before us tonight as a free standing measure is because of the senate's unwise action in stripping these border security provisions from the bill.

as for the emergency spending, we did run surpluses in this country in the 1990's, we remember that period when we were paying off part of the national debt. unfortunately, that's not the period we're talking about when we talk about the previous precedents that have been set in this area. the emergency spending that was done during the last administration in this border security area on three occasions under republican leadership, this was done not at a time of budget surpluses. it was done at a time in fact when this nation was sinking deeper and deeper into debt. so with that, i -- we have no more speakers on our side, i appreciate the attention of our colleagues and especially the work that's gone into this measure from our colleagues on the southwest border. they have been absolutely tireless in standing up for

their constituents and in calling to the rest of the congress and the rest of the country this emergency situation that demands to be addressed. mr. cuellar, i think it was, this afternoon said to the press, however, that this isn't just a border matter. this isn't just a border security mat eric this is a matter of national security, it's a matter of urgent national security. we are grateful for those who have worked very quickly now after the developments in the senate, have worked quickly to put this bill forward in this form. we urge its passage we want to send it along to the senate and hope very much that this bill will be law in a matter of days, and that we can get the emergency relief where it's needed and then of course we will address all these matters more systematically and in a more longer term basis in the regular appropriations bill. with that, i 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. 5875? 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.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> i move that the house suspend the rules and concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 5610. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5610, an act to provide technical adjustment with respect to funding for independent living centers under the rehabilitation act of 1973 in order to ensure

stability for such centers. senate amendment. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from california, ms. chu, and the gentleman from utah, mr. bishop, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california. ms. chu: mr. speaker, i request five legislative days in which members may revise and extend and insert extraneous material on h r. 5610 into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. chu: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. chu: a month ago we passed h.r. 56 10, the independent living centers technical adjustment act to provide a necessary fict to provide services for many people with disabilities who benefit from the work of the independent living centers this fix will allow states to request that our funds not be included in determining their center's previous year allocations so that the temporary funds provided do not permanently change centers' base

allocations. the senate amendment before us today changes the deadline for states to make that request from july 30 to august 5 so that eligible states can make use of this fix after this bill is passed. i urge you to support this technical change to ensure independent living centers can continue the important work for people with disabilities in our communities. i reserve the balance of my time. .=tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. bishop: i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise in support of h.r. 5610, the independent living centers technical adjustment act. they provide a valuable service, employment, skill training for people with disabilities. the act was passed in the house and senate allows them to apply for a waiver for funds received

under the american recovery and reinvestment act. because of a discrepancy in how current law in prior year funds, they will see dramatic decreases. this technical fix will enable funds granted through the reeblingts act to be distributed to independent centers. the house passed version of this legislation allows states to apply for these important waivers until july 30. because of the deadline included in the original version of h.r. 5060, it does not provide susht time. the senate extended the time line until august 5. i stand in support of this bill which will assist independent living centers for citizens to live full and productive lives and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. ms. chu: does the gentleman have

further speakers? mr. bishop: i do not. i yield back. ms. chu: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the ruse and concur in the senate amendment to h.r. 5610. 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 senate amendment 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 california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to

suspend the rules and pass resolution 1558. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 1558, resolution expressing the sense of the house of representatives that fruit and vegetable and commodity producers are encouraged to display the american flag on labels of products grown in the united states, reminding us all to take pride in the healthy bounty produced by american farmers and workers. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california, mr. cardoza and the gentlewoman from ohio, mrs. schmidt, esm will have 20 minutes. card card -- carscars i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.

>> my farmers produce a bounty of fruits and vegetables that feed families across the country and abroad. my farmers work hard. they love their families, their farms and their healthy products that they grow. they also love their country. as with many of my constituents, they are proud to fly the american flag on memorial day and fourth of july. this act encourages farmers to feature the american flag so all americans know quickly and easily that the food they are feeding their families is grown with pride right here in the good old u.s.a. in the u.s., we have 310 million consumers to feed and many of the food is supplied by our hard-working farmers here at home. whether you realize it or not, agriculture is at the center of our vital issues, feeding the

hungry, improving our health, addressing the crisis of chood hood obesity, school lunch program and many, many more. where does that come from? from people across the united states who are more curious about their food sources. they want to know more about the food products themselves and who grew it. this resolution also has a practical application. starting in 2002, congressman dated that all food products be labeled with their country of origin. we had a sense that consumers wanted to know the true origins of their food. and when given that choice, americans will choose an american-made product mostly every time. this strengthens demand for u.s. farmers and ranchers. it is also important that the public understand the vital role domestic agriculture carriers out to produce the safest and

highest quality food in the world. agriculture not only serves the public, but also creates jobs right here. in a time of economic hardship, a strong agricultural structure is needed to ensure employment at multiple levels. we often use the expression, farm to fork in reference to the jobs gained as a certain commodity is grown, harvested, bagged, packed, labeled, shipped and sold at local farmers' markets and neighborhood grocery stores. with this resolution, consumers can be empowered to choose american products over foreign imports. the flag clearly communicates the origin of the foot or vegetable and easier to read than the fine print. if we want to feed our children the healthiest possible foods and try to create jobs in our country, we need to encourage

american production of american products. i'm proud of the great agriculture tradition of this country, mr. speaker. and i encourage my colleagues to support this resolution. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from ohio is recognized. >> i rise in support of house resolution 1558, which expresses the sense of congress that our nation's farmers use the american flag to promote fruits, vegetables and commodities produced in the united states. in the early 20th century, 40% of americans were engaged in agricultural production. today that number is down to 1.75%. our nation's farmers and ranchers provide americans the safest, most affordable and most abundant food supply in the history of the world.

our bounty is sustainable and nutritious food is so great that we see -- we feed countless americans around the worls. they endure uncertain weather and animal and pest threats in order to participate in a competitive market. this resolution encourages them to stand tall for what they provide for us every day. when passage of the 2008 farm bill closed, the long-running debate on mandatory country of origin labeling for fruits, vegetables, meat and poultry was a concern among opponents that we should not impose labeling. the reasoning held that origin labeling is an element of marketing and should be left to the producers, packers, producers and retailers that bring food to our table.

proponents argued that affixing labeling would enhance value and benefit farmers and ranchers. mr. speaker, no matter what position an individual has taken on the question of country origin labeling, it is easy to support this resolution. house resolution 1558 averts that the american flag be a positive at try beauty that farmers are encouraged to use this symbol to promote the products they grow here at home in america. mr. speaker, i support this resolution because it encourages our farmers and ranchers to be their own self-interest while refraining from additional regulatory requirements or burdens. i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. >> i thank the gentlelady for her support of this resolution.

it's a pleasure to serve with her on the subcommittee of the agriculture committee and i would just say that support of this resolution is, in fact, as she said something that will help promote products and it is voluntary. i have no further speakers so i reserve the balance of my time to close and ask the gentlelady to close on her own time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. mrs. schmidt: i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: she yields back. the gentleman from california is recognized. ms. kosmas: i yield back and i ask the colleagues to support the motion. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 15589, those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. -- in the opinion of the chair --

>> i request a recorded vote on this motion. i demand its yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor say aye. of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, 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 california seerk recognition? mr. cardoza: i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 4658 as amended. the clerk: h.r. 4658, a bill to authorize the conveyance of a small parcel of national forest

land in the cherokee national forest and authorize the secretary of agriculture to use the proceeds from that conveyance to acquire a parsell of land for inclusion in that national land and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california, mr. cardoza and the gentlewoman from ohio, mrs. schmidt each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. cardoza: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on bill h.r. 465. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cardoza: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cardoza: mr. speaker, h.r. 4658, the benton mackaye cherokee national forest land consolidation act authorizes the conveyance of land in the cherokee national forest and authorizes the secretary to use

the proceeds of the sale of that land for purchase of other suitable land within the forest. this bill sponsored by my colleague from tennessee, representative dumping and, has the support of the -- duncan, has the support of the forest service. it would relieve the forest service of 66.5-acre parcel of land that has been maintained by the local baptist church. it will purchase the land to make the needed expansion to the property's cemetery and church buildings. the proceeds of the sale will be used to purchase the dok rogers's tract. this tract is close to the benton mackaye hiking trail which feeds into the ap latchian trail. the local community supports this trail including the parcel on the forest boundary. i encourage all my colleagues to support the legislation.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from ohio is recognized. mrs. schmidt: i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 4658, a bill that authorizes two land exchanges in the cherokee national forest. this legislation authorizes the forest service to sell a 66-acre tract of land to the local baptist church in order to enlarge their cemetery which is the boundary of the national forest. the funds the forest service receives from this sale would be used to purchase 102-acre tract of land to add to the national forest. i think it's a good deal. the land exchanges would ensure better land management by the forest service and the cherokee national forest. this bill will not cost the taxpayers one penny.

the church is responsible for all costs associated with the purchase of the land. the gentleman from tennessee, mr. duncan, has worked with the forest service to ensure that this bill is drafted in a manner that is acceptable to all interested parties, including the community. i think this is a great idea. i hope my colleagues will join me in supporting this bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. cardoza: i have no further speakers and i ask the gentlelady to proceed to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from ohio is recognized. mrs. schmidt: i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. cardoza: i 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 h.r. 4658 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 the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. cardoza: thank you, mr. speaker. i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 5669, as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 5669, a bill to direct the secretary of agriculture to convey certain federally owned located land in story county, iowa. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california, mr. cardoza, and -- mr. cardoza and the gentlewoman from ohio, mrs. schmidt, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. cardoza: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on the bill, h.r. 5669. the speaker pro tempore: without

objection. mr. cardoza: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cardoza: mr. speaker, h.r. 5669 would authorize the secretary of agriculture to sell a parcel of land that is part of the national animal disease center to the city of ames, iowa, in order to facilitate the building of a new water treatment facility. phased -- faced with increase deg manned in the aging infrastructure, the city is determined that the most cost effective solution is to build a new plant. the land owned by usda adjacent to the national animal disease center is such a suitable location. if congress does not authorize this land for sale, then the city of ames may find itself in an unpopular position of using imminent domain to acquire land to move forward with the project. it makes sense to move this legislation quickly so that a needed infrastructure project can move forward, especially since the united states department of agriculture has expressed support for this legislation.

i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting this bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from ohio is recognized. mrs. schmidt: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. schmidt: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, today i rise in support of h.r. 5669. this bill will allow the agricultural research service to convey 44 acres of land in ames, iowa, to the city of ames. the funds derived from this conveyance will then be used by the agricultural research service to purchase replacement land and for other purposes relating to the national animal disease center. the national animal disease center, located in ames, iowa, is the largest federal animal disease center in the united states. this facility along with the national veterinaryy services laboratory, and the center for

veterinary biologies co-located on the same site, make up our national centers for animal health. the usda has advised that it has no longer any use for the land to be conveyed and that it supports this legislation. this legislation is important for the continued development and operation of this critical laboratory facility and i ask my colleagues to support this legislation and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. cardoza: thank you, mr. speaker. i have no further speakers on my side of the aisle so i'd ask the gentlelady to call on her -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from ohio is recognized. mrs. schmidt: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield to mr. latham as much time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: i thank you, speaker, and i thank the gentlewoman from ohio for yielding. and the gentleman from california. and certainly want to thank chairman peterson and ranking

member lucas for waving jurisdiction so we could -- waiving jurisdiction so we could shepherd this bill through the floor. h.r. 5669. this bill really is a solution for the city of ames and the local land owners. h.r. 5669 will allow the city to buy land from the usda's national animal disease center and use that land to build a modern water treatment plant. before introducing this legislation, the city officials were exploring the acquisition of nearby farm land by imminent domain. this will -- bill will prevent a conflict between the city of ames and the local land owners. the farmland in question is highly productive land in fact, it's a century farm. it's been in that family for over 100 years. century farms have a special status in iowa and the families who have carried on the tradition of farming have deep ties to the soil. working with the city of ames and the usda, i believe that we

have found a way to preserve this fertile land and honor the memory of the man who began farming it. he was union army veteran, picked this land because it was near iowa state university and knew his descendents would be able to get a quality education while making a living through farming. h.r. 5669 is a win for everyone involved. ames, iowa, will be able to proceed with this water treatment facility, residents will have clean water and the animal disease center will be able to plan for its needs and the land owners will be spared the loss of productive farm land --land -- farmland. i appreciate the time and i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mrs. schmidt: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. cardoza: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to congratulate my friend and colleague from iowa for doing what seems to be a very responsible piece of legislation here. i have no further speakers.

i 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. 566 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. -- 5669 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 bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the speaker pro tempore: the chairman will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. thompson: thank you. mr. speaker, i rise today to

congratulate mr. john coleman from pennsylvania on his pennsylvania state senate confirmation as commissioner of the pennsylvania public utility commission. coleman recently resigned as the president and c.e.o. of the chamber of business and industry of center county after 11 years of dedicated service. under john's leadership, the chamber experienced significant organizational growth, becoming the largest business membership organization in central pennsylvania. he oversaw such projects as the construction of the 217-acre veteran commerce park, adding to his reputation. through his work in state college, he has proven himself to be an effective leader and as he prepares to pick up and move to harrisburg, i'm certain he'll be a valuable addition to the commission. he'll join the five-member commission which provides oversight to more than 8,600 utility and transportation companies and provides work for approximately 500 employees. his experience as president of chamber as well as his overall expertise will certainly prove useful during his service in

harrisburg. i wish mr. coleman the best of luck in his upcoming endeavor. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: are there further one-minute requests? for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered noorks the following members may be permitted to address the house for five mines, to revise and extend their remarks and include therein -- minute, to revise and extend their remarks and include therein extraneous material. ms. sutton, ohio, mr. bright, alabama, ms. woolsey, california, mr. defazio, oregon, and ms. kaptur, ohio. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania

rise? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that today following legislative business and any special orders entered into, the following members may be permitted to address the house, revise and extend their remarks and include therein extraneous materials. mr. putnam for july 29 for five minutes, mr. fortenberry today for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. 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. ms. lee, california. for what purpose does the gentlelady from ohio seek recognition? ms. sutton: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. sutton: mr. speaker, i rise today with the heavy heart to honor the life and service of barberton police chief michael.

he suffered a fatal heart attack while vacationing in tennessee with his family. he was a committed public servant, a 32-year veteran of the barberton police department, serving the last 13 years as police chief. but most importantly, he was the loving and devoted husband of 35 years to his wife, jennifer, and the proud father of four, michael jr., joe, zach and vanessa. the chief was also very proud to be an assistant wrestling coach at the high school for the past 19 years. he was born in barberton, ohio, and lived in the area all of his life. and he touched the lives of people all across our community with his outgoing spirit. the chief was known as a cop's cop and a true professional. his desk was a shock to -- his death was a shock to his family and the city of barberton and

the numerous communities throughout ohio which he touched. over the past weeks, we have seen just how much he meant to so many. though he was soft spoken, mike had a commanding presence and was very well respected and as the hardest worker on the force, helped every service department in barberton in some way or another. so much love was felt for the chief throughout the community that over 100 former and present wrestlers who were coached by the chief were in attendance at his funeral. and police officers stood at attention outside the church? sweltering heat -- church in sweltering heat. his spirit and dedication to our community will be sorely missed but his service and his sacrifice will never be forgotten.

barberton was the community he grew up in, it was the community he served in and he embraced. his memory will live on in the hearts of his family, friends and our community. the chief will truly be missed. we will always remember mike for his commitment to his community and his dedication to his family. he was a friend and a leader and he leaves a void that cannot be filled in many. on behalf of the people of ohio's 13th district, i want to express my deepest sympathies to the family. they have lost a great son, brother, husband, father and grandfather who passed away much too soon and we have lost a true friend and committed member of our community. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. mr. moran of kansas.

for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i rise to address the house, revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. fortenberry: mr. speaker, i rise today to congratulate the oilers for winning the state softball championship. . . five ladies were named to the all-state team. the coach and her soviet ball team posted an impressive 37-6-1 record for the season. there is no question that these students have taken the leadership, dedication and commitment that it takes to

achieve great things now and in the future. and their persistence. they finished second last year. now, they are number one. the lady oilers are proven role models and a source of pride. with hard work and dedication, they have achieved their goals. mr. speaker, i congratulate the lady oilers on their championship and thank them for representing their community and school in a manner befitting the champions they are. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. mr. towns of new york. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. poe of texas. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i request unanimous consent to provide my five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes.

mr. thompson: mr. speaker, i rise this evening to mark a number of very important anniversaries and celebrations within my congressional district. first today i rise todd to honor the compassionate work that goes on in the nearly 100-year-old children aid society house in clearfield, pennsylvania. on this coming august 6, the society will be celebrating its 120th anniversary marking over a century of dedication and service. originally founded as a child welfare agency that served to place orphan children into suitable homes. several auxillaries were established. and they proved instrumental in fundraising and maintaining contact with the children placed in homes. the society also expanded within clearfield and became involved in big brothers, big sisters and

health and human services council. they have reseffed praise and support from the public and battled through financial issues. their endurance through time and far-reaching services attest to the authenticity of their work. i congratulate on their success and wish them the best in their future and here is to another 120 years of wonderful service. mr. speaker, this august marks the 200th anniversary of johnsonberg burrough in elk county. its major industry was paper with the mills still operating. originally owned by curtis publishing company which published the saturday evening post and thought to be the largest paper mill in the world. it is the oldest settlement in elk county.

former president grant used to come there to fish and visited other retired civil war generals. as befits the 200 anniversary, they will hold parade and ceremonies. there will be a social fireworks display, pancake breakfast. games to elvis impersonations, three-days of activities promise to hold something for everyone. i'm proud of this community in my district and i wish continued success for the next 200 years. the tiny community of tioga celebrates its 150 anniversary this year and located in tioga near the border of new york state. it was a dens and overpowering wilderness of pines and teaming wildlife.

the inhabit tants were tribes of indians who viewed it as prime hunting and fishing grounds. it took a brave family to travel from new jersey and become the first settlers in the area. later, another acquired the land and built a house at the southern end of the border, now located beneath the dam. there is a story that he won it in a poker game and first local elections were held in 1804. it was 1860 when tiogaburrough was recognize as a separate division. the residents are proud and i wish them congratulations on this historic occasion. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mr. jones of north carolina. mr. bright of alabama.

mr. burton of indiana. ms. woolsey of california. mr. putnam of florida. mr. defazio of oregon. ms. ros-lehtinen of florida. miskaptur of ohio. mr. lincoln diaz-balart of florida. mr. fortenberry of nebraska. under the speaker's announced policy january 6, 2009, the gentleman from california, mr. garamendi, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. garamendi: mr. speaker, before i start, i would like to ask unanimous consent that all

members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of manufacturing in america. this is the subject of my special order tonight. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. so ordered. mr. garamendi: i might just review with you and others what's happened since 2007 here in the united states as this diagram indicates, beginning in 2007, the great recession during the george w. bush administration ending -- not ending but reaching its lowest point in december and january of 2008 and january of 2009 where 750,000 jobs were lost. the barack obama administration came in in january of 2009 and

within two months passed the first stimulus bill, which leveled off the decline and slowly began the recovery of the american economy. and most every month since january of january 2009, we have seen an improvement so that in this year, 2010, we are now seeing small but important gains in the employment in america, some 600,000 jobs have been created over the last several months. this is the result of policies that were enacted by the democratic congress, the senate and signed by the president. those policies we need to understand. they began with the stimulus bill and carried on through several other pieces of legislation. in each and every one of those pieces of legislation, there was no help from our republican colleagues. they were absent. they voted no on the stimulus,

the american recovery and reinvestment act, they voted on the home ownership and business assistance act, 100% voted no on the stimulus. it has stabilized the economy and then led to 2,800,000 people keeping their jobs and getting it here in the united states. the student aid and financial responsibility act, 100% republicans voted no denying students pell grants. the cash for clunkers and majority voteed for it. the hire act, creating 300,000 jobs. it was the democrats and the republicans voted no. so after this 18 months of concerted effort to create jobs

in america through the various stimulus programs such as the cash for clunkers, the homeowners' assistance program, all of those, we have seen improvements. but this was the first 18 months. we are now moving onto the second half of the democratic agenda. and if i might just reach over here, this is the second half of the democratic agenda, make it in america. make it in america so that america can make it. manufacturing matters. and that's the subject of our discussion. the first 18 months get people back to work, stimulate the economy, set a solid foundation. we're now on the road to permanent improvement in the american economy through manufacturing. joining me here tonight are my

colleagues from wisconsin and from the great state of ohio to talk about manufacturing in the heartland, some of it a little cool or cold, depending on the time of the year, and some of it, the central part of america's manufacturing sk tore. i would like to ask the gentlewoman from ohio, betty sutton, to join us and share her experiences with the great state of ohio and making it in america. ms. sutton: thank you for your leadership as we move forward to activate our manufacturing base, to revitalize our economy. by enacting policies that will work with our u.s. manufacturers and our workers. we're going to make it in america. manufacturing is the backbone of our economy. it's the backbone of our national security and frankly, the promise of the middle class.

when i grew up, it was a time when people could count on a good manufacturing job to put food on the table and take care of their families and have a pension that would be there when they retired. but we have watched our nation witness the loss of millions of good manufacturing jobs due to policies that put our companies and workers at an unfair disadvantage. and over the last decade, we have seen those effects across the country but seen them in a big way in ohio. the u.s. has lost manufacturing jobs with ohio losing one in three manufacturing jobs. we have seen factory after factory close as jobs are shifted overseas. we have seen our workers and jobs undercut by foreign countries and foreign companies and competitors that engage in unfair trade tactics ranking

from chinese currency manipulation, which is cheating, to illegally subsidized steel and for too long we haven't had a comprehensive plan to reverse this trend. but with our make it in america trend, we are saying very loudly, very clearly and very persistently that we have had enough, that we are going to pass policies that work with and for our u.s. manufacturers and our workers and our country. today we passed three bills that are going to bolster u.s. manufacturing and provide for families in northeast ohio and across this country opportunities for good jobs for today and tomorrow, because although we may make different things or improve things, we still need to make things. and we're going to do it today and we're going to do it tomorrow. manufacturing jobs have a

plultplire effect. it can generate at least four other jobs in the private sector. and our workers can compete, we know it, as as long as they have a level playing field and our make it in america agenda is going to help level that playing field. so i'm very happy to be with you. i'm not we are going to talk about the bills that were passed today. and before i turn it over, talk about something we are going to do tomorrow. tomorrow, we're going to, under the make it in america agenda, take up the assistance, quality and affordability act. it includes an amendment of mine that will ensure that when u.s. taxpayer dollars, they are going to be used to build our city's water and sewer systems, when they do that american manufactured goods are going to be used to build it.

and it's just another example of the things we can do to make it in america and make it possible for our workers and our economy to make it in america. mr. garamendi: if you would yield for a moment, do i understand you to say that presently our tax dollars that are used for water projects and sanitation projects purchase steel, pumps, other material that is manufactured overseas? ms. sutton: we have seen our buy america provisions in a number of our bills be whittled away over time so we aren't ensured the way we should be. that when taxpayer dollars are used, i think the american taxpayers expect we use american goods and that's what this amendment is now going to ensure. so the situation you describe can't happen.

mr. garamendi: we will use our tax dollars to create manufacturing jobs in america. we will make it in america. if the gentlelady wol yield, i would like to turn to our colleague, dr. kagen, from wisconsin. he and i were chatting earlier and he was in a rage on what happens in the international skine. would you like to share that -- scene. would you like to their that with us, dr. kagen snr. mr. kagen: mrs. suten in ohio described what we need -- sutton in ohio described what we need. we need a level playing field because on a level playing field we can compete and win against anybody in the world as long as we have a level playing field. but that level playing field hasn't existed for quite some time. and i'm not going to point fingers at which party started it because we all had something to do with it. democrats and republicans alike. how did it happen? how did our manufacturing base escape and bleed away?

who opened the door? who put the hole in the ship? who bled away our american manufacturing base? i think it was corporate america. i think today we're really back to 1910 where our real competition is on wall street and so when people are back home listening tonight they have to ask themselves the question, well, whose side are we on? do we have our heads in the boardroom of a wall street bank, a wall street corporation that is benefiting by shipping our jobs overseas? no, not at all. we have our feet on the factory floor and our voting record shows it. you mentioned earlier in your opening remarks about tax cuts. the democrats have delivered over $300 billion of tax cuts to the middle class. to people like elaine who wrote me this note, it's people like elaine who have run the bell. quote, i'm soon an 80-year-old woman and a widow. my husband and i farmed and we

certainly had hard times the first years but the years now are harder for old people. oil companies take a huge profit. the c.e.o.'s make a salary no man on earth is worth. pill companies are taking huge profits with no consideration for old people. the people of my generation lived through the depression, world war irchings i and two more wars and -- ii and two more wars and now in our old age we face other obstacles. elaine has nailed it. we are on her side. we have voted to prevent the republicans from privatizing social security. we voted to prevent the republicans from sending her money to wall street. we voted to strengthen medicare and make sure that there are services available for prevention at no cost to her and her husband, should he still be around. we have strengthened medicare and the republicans are trying to destroy it.

but let me come back to the essential point of being here. we know things are tough for everybody in california, ohio, wisconsin and everywhere else in america. how did it get this way? well, we've been through some tough times. we're going to make it and we have a lot of work to do. but what happened to our middle class? the middle class destruction. here's where it is today. today the banks own more homes than people do. mr. garamendi: excuse me. mr. kagen: yes. mr. garamendi: are you telling us that the banks own more homes than the individual families? mr. kagen: the bags own more homes today than -- the banks own more homes today than individual banks do. those would be banks who have created these derivatives to somehow gin up the mortgage market to $63 trillion when it was down to $13 trillion. the banks own more homeness that people do but people need to be in -- homes than people do but

people need to be in their own homes at a price they can afford to pay. secondly, executives on wall street are having incomes that are 300 times that of the worker on the factory floor. 300 to one. 25, 30 years ago it was 20 to 25 to one. now it's 300 to one. so things have been tilted in wall street's favor. again, whose side are you on? wall street or main street? third, these numbers are pretty frightening. mr. garamendi: if the gentleman would yield. the wall street reform act goes to the heart of both of those issues. there was significant reform of the mortgage industry and the wall street reform and consumer protection act and there was also a provision, well, not in the wall street reform act, but there's a debate going on now here in congress and in the senate about what to do with this executive pay. this 300 to one ratio. that is the question of do we

continue the middle class tax cuts and let the tax cuts that the bush administration put in for the high and the mighty and the wealthy -- mr. kagen: would the gentleman yield? mr. garamendi: please. mr. kagen: the wealthy in america have had a 10-year free ride. for the past 10 years theb they haven't paid their fair share. and as a direct result, 63% of the people in america that used to be middle class are now living paycheck to paycheck and week to week and 43% of americans have less than $10,000 in their retirement fund. that's going up toward half the people in this country will never be able to retire. things have tilted toward the top this trickle-up philosophy that the republicans launched on us for the past eight years really hasn't worked for the middle class. that's why i call it middle class destruction and the numbers prove it. we have to keep people in their own homes but they can only

afford a home if they have a higher wage job, a job where they're making things in america. let me show you this one. you thought that was bad. here's our competition. how does the middle class become destroyed? well, how do you compete with garment workers in china who are being paid 82 cents per hour? well, i guess you go to cambodia because they get paid 22 cents per hour. now, what american watching tonight, you think elaine's children and grandchildren are looking forward to working at 22 centance hour? maybe the banks should own -- cents an hour? maybe the banks should own all the homes. i don't know why we even talk about it. it's an endangered species. this has come about -- mr. garamendi: before you go to the next issue, i recall a piece of legislation that we had on the floor more than a month ago

and that piece of legislation dealt with corporate tax breaks and it ended corporate tax breaks for corporations that ship jobs yeafer shore -- offshore. when a corporation under the present tax code sends a job offshore they get a tax break. it amounts to $14.5 billion a year. and the previous -- will you put that previous one back up? mr. kagen: i sure would. mr. garamendi: so -- mr. kagen: you want 22 cents an hour? mr. garamendi: either way. so if the corporation were to be making shirts, ties, suits here in america, they could ship those jobs to china or cambodia and get a tax break. now this house voted to end that tax break. we voted to end that tax break and -- mr. kagen: but it was democrats.

mr. garamendi: whose side are you on? every republican voted to continue that corporate tax break. giving those corporations a tax advantage, literally giving them our tax money so that they could offshore that garment work. ms. sutton: will the gentleman yield? because you bring up such an important point. so we have these policies, this policy that encouraged jobs to be moved offshore. and we had other policies that frankly allowed for unfair practices to undercut our workers and our businesses. for many years. and now i know we're all pretty new here, so, you know, i'm in my second term and you're in your first term and the gentleman from wisconsin, you know, we just came here, so we're fresh in the fight. mr. kagen: we're cleaning up the mess. ms. sutton: we're fresh in the fight. but the reality of this is, it's important to notice what was happening before the big

recession hit. so in ohio those wages have taken our jobs overseas with the help of tax policies that we have finally been able, with the majority on this side of the aisle, to pass by ourselves to try and change. and it does beg the question, and i listened to your comments earlier about how we went through this litany of measures, to try and stabilize the economy and we did and now, of course, this is so important because this goes beyond stabilizing the economy and it goes towards creating real value by making real things, not pretend value that the banks made and people moving money around made. mr. kagen: will the gentlewoman yield? ms. sutton: i will yield. mr. kagen: we want a middle class to have higher wage jobs, to earn the money they need, to not just educate themselves as

workers, but also their families, to begin to save for retirement that so far they haven't had, and that can only happen with manufacturing jobs. but how can any corporation on wall street or main street compete with the government? quheas really going on in the world -- what's really going on in the world today is the free market capitalism idea that grew up our middle class, the greatest middle class in human history. free market capitalism has bumped into a brick wall in china. because the chinese and asian model of capitalism is the government is the business. because over in china, the case against china, they have no environmental protection laws. we do. the cost of everything we make went up. theirs went down. they have absolutely no social safety net. if a worker in a factory gets injured he or she is a wind chill et and is gone. no social safety net. and finally they really until recently haven't had a middle class.

they're beginning to move up and develop a middle class, but, you know, where i come from, why should we have to have our middle class begin to disappear just so they can develop their own? i think that's wrong and my final slide here, the case against china. everybody on the democratic side of the aisle is fervently interested in promoting making things in america. but how can we compete against china when they continue to manipulate their currency? it gives them a 20% to 40% price advantage right out of the chute. when china provides subsidies to investors from foreign nations to come in and not pay taxes for several years, well, we can't afford to do that. we actually care about people in america. and what about the value, added tax, giving them 17% benefit? they have import various you can't believe and then something

else, buy american, they've had a number of years, buy chinese. they have taken advantage of the united states of america and this congress, boat the house and the senate, -- both the house and the senate, until this point in time, has been had. because we've chased things to the lowest price of production but these days must come to an end and i believe it's time for the american people to understand whose side are we on. the democrat it's have a policy and a way forward to work our way back into prosperity and it begins with addressing our trade imbalance with asia and specifically with china. it begins with this administration changing their mind about allowing china to manipulate its currency. it against -- begins with people like ms. sutton, gar mendy, myself, standing up to big corporations in wall street and calling them out. it's time to change their ways, begin making things in america. do that through our trade deals

as well. and i yield. mr. garamendi: would you like to pick it up from there? ms. sutton: i appreciate the gentleman's remarks and i would because, you know, sometimes we come down here and we make the case, but it's important to also let people know that it's not just us saying, it's the economic policy institute, on this point about china. the economic policy institute reported that unfair trade with china has cost our nation $2.4 -- 2.4 million jobs between 2001 and 2008. ohio, where i am so honored to serve, has lost nearly 92,000 jobs because of china alone. and my congressional district, the 13th district of ohio, made up of hardworking citizens who want nothing but a fair shake, in my congressional district,

5,700 jobs have been lost as a result of china's currency manipulation and other illegal subsidies and unfair trade barriers. and these, of course, are good paying jobs that pay families sustaining wages. if i could just indulge the gentleman for one moment about a case study, something that has played out in the past year or so. you know, during this recession, when market forces would indicate that you cut back on steal production, do you -- steel production, do you know what china did? they ramp up production. they dump that steel into the united states and my steel companies, our manufacturing companies and lorraine, ohio, at u.s. steel, i like that name, u.s. steel, were undercut and so our workers were laid off. so what did we do? what is our mechanism?

right, our mechanism is we go to the international trade commission. so they had a preliminary hearing and i went to the preliminary hearing which was evidently an -- evidently an unusual move but i think, i got to do everything i can to stand up for the people that i represent. so i wept to the preliminary hearing -- went to the preliminary hearing, we got them to move the process forward to a final hearing. we took a letter, i took a letter signed by 40-some colleagues in this house, and we went -- i went and got others to go and we all went to the final hearing of the i.t.c., this was about oil country tubular goods which is what we make in the 13th congressional district and how china was unfairly subsidizing their steel. . that's good news, but the people have been out of a job for over

a year. mr. garamendi: if i might, just bring that to the west coast, the san francisco bay bridge from oakland to san francisco, major artery, had a problem with the earthquake and had to be rebuilt. it's been a long process to rebuild it. it's going to be a magnificent new bridge. the caltrans, went out to bid and american contractor proposed two bids. one bid was the steel would be manufactured and fabricated here in the united states. the other bid was the steel would be manufactured and fabricated in china. there was a 10% difference. the state of california chose to save 10% and all of the steel winds up being imported from china. we lost jobs. this is an example of where our tax money -- and that's exactly

what it is, was not used to support american jobs, but rather used to support jobs in china, for what? 10%. it turned out to be more expensive, because the chinese welds in the fabrication were not satisfactory and were purposely hidden and it was only because an inspector finally arrived from california and looked at it and said oh, my, this will not work. so they had to go back and do the whole thing over again. one example. i'll give you more examples as we go down here. but we can make it in america. wind turbines. we led in the development of wind turbines. we are spending billions of dollars a year to subsidize the wind turbine industry. china said, oh, we have wind in china. let's build wind turbines. they have excluded every international company except a

chinese company into manufacturing turbines and now they are exporting those turbines to america, the same with photo panels and i'll come to buses a little later. but i find extraordinarily wrong and we are going to change it. and before this conversation is over, we are going to talk about how it can change. dr. kagen. mr. kagen: i was very moved by the idea of steel being targeted for extinction by communist china. but i represent paper valley, we have 22 different paper companies. we invented the tissue products. we have some tremendous paper products, but we have some problems. the problem is that china has targeted not just steel for extinction here in america,

automobiles and a number of other things. and the list goes on. power generation, oil and petro chemicals, telecommunications, shipping, automobiles, information technology, iron, steel, they have some very strategic plans under way to target we manufacture to take the jobs away and let me detail how they did it in paper. the government would purchase raw materials in brazil at government expense, ship it over to china. ship it from the port on trucks up to the paper mill. make the paper and then again at government expense after the government allows slave-like wages to be paid. the government pays for the product to be shipped, shipped off of oakland and dumped into the united states of america, below our cost of production. well, as ms. sutton pointed out, the international trade commission can at times be effective, but it takes so long.

you know, justice delayed is justice denied. and health care, treatment delayed is malpractice. and what happened in the paper industry, we lost two paper companies in my district because of unfair trade and unbalanced trade with communist china. only recently did the appleton company that makes coded paper have a successful case before the i.t.c. i had the opportunity to testify, much as betty did. and i was proud to hold up a picture of a family and let these judges know that we aren't talking about dollars and cents and the worth of a piece of paper. we are talking about people that live in their home and can't chase their job to china. you can't swim to china and survive there. we have to ship our values overseas, not our jobs. ms. sutton: would the gentleman yield? you are so right.

and i just want to put a highlight on this fact. when we went to that hearing, the standard for judgment is material harm. so we showed that these actions were undertaken and resulted in material harm. and that material harm, those are people. people with families, that they are trying to raise right here in this country, right in lorraine, ohio and in wisconsin and all over this great country. and because of the length of time that this went on, these folks didn't have the income coming in. and guess what? then our communities didn't have the tax base to support, what, police, fire and city services. and we end up paying unemployment and people suffer the losses of the dignity of work, which is so important to the people that i represent.

they just want an opportunity. mr. garamendi: would the gentlelady yield? mr. kagen: everybody that we represent understands the united states of america can't pay its bills, can't pay its debts on unemployment checks. we need real checks, checks that come from manufacturing and that we can do with balanced trade, but we are running out of time. the american people understand that. that's part of their anger and part of their great frustration. and i know we have been listening to them on the democratic side of the aisle and he are moving as hard as we can against any administration, against anyone in the united states senate to begin to identify how we can begin to make things in america again and put people back to work and stay in their own home. mr. garamendi: at the beginning of this discussion, the gentlewoman from ohio talked about the wise use of our tax money, in this case, in the

water systems and the sanitation systems, to use that tax money for materials and products and machines that are built in america. that's but one example. it's a very good example, because we desperately need that infrastructure. it's the foundation for quality life, healthy life, as well as for building our economy. there is another one that came to me in this process. today, i had a telephone town hall and a fellow said in vallejo, california, the old ship ward yard has this huge building and one of the european train companies is setting up a shop there. they don't know what they are going to do there, but is there some way you could help that company bring to vallejo to refurbish trains? and my answer was yes. we had a buy american provision

with your tax money for years and years. there have been four waivers, four waivers that secretaries of transportation have used repeatedly for more than 20 years now to waive off, forget about, ignore the by america clause. so about $5 billion a year of our gasoline tax money is used not to buy buses and trains and light rail cars nade in america, but -- made in america, but made overseas. a piece of legislation that i have introduced, a lot of support among my democratic colleagues to simply tell the secretary of transportation, you don't have four waivers. we are eliminating three of those discretionary waivers. if the cost is more than 25%, then maybe you can have a waiver. the other three waivers, they're

gone. we are bringing those manufacturing jobs, those manufacturing jobs that build the buses, that build the trains, that build the cars, the transit cars here in washington, d.c., we are going to make those in america because that is our taxpayer and use it in america just as we are going to use our tax dollars to make those sanitation systems and water systems from american-made goods. that's our promise. and we can do it. i talked to secretary lahood, the secretary of transportation yesterday. i said, mr. secretary, i know you have been working hard not to give waivers, but i want to give you -- in fact i want to take away three of the tools that your predecessors have used to ship jobs overseas. and he said, i'm not giving waivers. and i said my bill passes, you won't be able to. we're going to spend that money in america.

one more example of what we can do, not just for jobs today, but for tomorrow and for generations in the future, using our tax money to make it in america, manufacturing matters. it's the heart and soul of the middle class. it's the strength of the economy and we're going to re-establish an america the manufacturing industries of yesterday and today, whether it's buses, trains or light rail. mr. kagen, you were getting kind of agitated. mr. kagen: i was going to ask you a question. is it true we have begun to close those tax loopholes that allowed these wall street corporations to take our jobs overseas? is that really true? mr. garamendi: well, the answer is halfway home. this house passed legislation more than a month ago. and tomorrow, i believe, we'll

have that same legislation back for another vote. our republican colleagues universally ended no on ending the tax loophole that gives corporations $14.5 billion of our tax money to offshore american jobs. we're going to end it and put the issue back on the floor tomorrow. the problem is the united states senate. and the republican party. where in the senate, one republican senator stands up and obts and says i'm going to filibuster and everything stops. they have to round up 60 votes. the march the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. controls that 60 votes. and they have said no to jobs for american workers in the first 18 months of this congress, where we have put 2.8 million people back to work. republicans in this house and

the senate say no. i have a solution for it. the next senator that says i object and i'm going to filibuster ought to be paraded down to the well of the senate, microphones turned on and start talking and see how long you are going to talk with the c-span cameras on you. you will make a fool of yourself. the filibuster will be over. and americans will be back to work. ms. sutton: call the bluff, make them get up and make the case to the american people why they are standing between american people. i don't think the american people will stand with them, but will stand with these policies we are offering now in this moment forward on making it in america. and i just have to ask the question because it is really

startling if you think about, you laid out all of the things we did to try to stabilize the economy and all the actions were -- were undertaken and have been undertaken where we can make products in america and lools enable our communities, workers and businesses to make it in america. and every once in a while, they turn on the tv and hear our counterparts on the other side and they sigh over and over again and if the american people won't notice, where are the jobs? where are the jobs? the reality is we are putting the bills on the floor and you are voting against the jobs. so don't -- there's this idea that they insult the american people by suggesting that somehow the jobs are missing.

you are voting against the jobs and now you have a chance to join us. . mr. garamendi: yesterday dr. kagen and i were in a meeting and we heard from a panel of contractors and bus manufacturers that the stimulus bill actually created jobs. mr. kagen and i, dr. kagen, i know you have personal experience in this, you told me about it earlier. why don't you share that experience where the republicans say, no jobs are created, yet the contractors, they're saying, thank goodness for the stimulus bill, because it kept me in business, can it kept my employees employed -- it kept my employees employed. mr. kagen: the real question is, where would america be today, where would our economy be today if we had not in february of 2009 passed the recovery and reinvestment act? we'd be in the tank.

mr. garamendi: that's that was the stimulus bill. mr. kagen: that was the stimulus bill. more and more people would be out of work. we stabilized state governments, we stabilized private corporations, like road builders, like asphalt people, like bridge builders. we made sure the police would be there when you dial 911. we stabilized fire departments to make sure if you're on fire at home, help will be on the way. but, no, somebody over there has got people con ficed and angry -- confused and rngry that somehow it just didn't work. look. many economists have said that the economic stimulus bill that we passed last year simply wasn't big enough to get us all the way out of the economic ditch that we're in. but make no mistake about it, the democratic party and all of us here in congress who are voting yes for progress, we are cleaning up after the biggest elephant parade in american history. there is so much mess to clean up. i always told my patients that

it would take you about as long to get better as it took you to get sick and to come into my office. and it's going to take us a while to work our way back into prosperity. we will succeed. but people in america have an election coming up and not to be electioneering but you have to ask yourself the question, what would your life be like without the stimulus bill and having the police and firemen there when you need them? what would your children's life be like at school not to have a qualified educator and teacher in the room to help your children get that world class education? they're going -- education they're going to need to compete against unfair trade deals as we have with asia? so the bill clearly worked and the testimony yesterday in the transportation and infrastructure was a resounding yes. i asked each of the gentlemen there to testify a hypothetical question. if you had been in congress, knowing what you know now about how it benefited your company, would you have voted for the stimulus bill? yes, yes, yes, yes, yes.

universally it has helped. now, where do we need to invest? here in america. and when i ask my constituents, i said, look, i'm your hired hand, i've got your tax dollars right here, where should we build the next bridge, the next school? in the stands of iraq, maybe in northern or southeastern afghanistan? no, doc we need that invested here at home -- doc, we need that invested here at home. our nation's infrastructure is about $2.1 trillion behind. we need to build our bridges once again, our schools, our water treatment plants, our hard-earned tax dollars are better invested here at home to grow the economy, to grow the jobs that we need, not on wall street, but on main street. and the real contest here is, who are we listening to? now, if the c-span camera pans around, they'll see there are a whole lot of empty chairs. but there are three members standing up having a

conversation about in which direction we're going to be moving. but you have to ask the question, who are these other gentlemen and ladies listening to? i'm listening to elaine, you're listening to the people from back home in california, from ohio, and this is a painful job. this is a painful job because progress is so slow. but be confident, america, we're beginning to make progress, we're moving our economy forward and up. we need to move up. not down. mr. garamendi: if the gentleman would yield. let me give another example of where we can set the stage for future manufacturing jobs in america. it was america that really created the cells. we've lost this industry in america. this is in china, shop of -- some of it is in europe, but it's no longer really much of a manufacturing industry in america. we talked earlier about the wind turbines and the way in which that industry has gone offshore. we talked about the buses.

it turns out that many, many economists and certainly i would join with them, say that the future industries are green technology industries. we have to shift away from coal and oil. we need to be energy independent. the green technologies, solar, wind, all of those, biofuels and algae fuel, all of those are the industries of the future. yet our tax money is not used to support those industries. all too often here's what happens, just as in buses, our tax money is used to buy wind turbines from china or korea. i'll give you another example on the wind turbines, let me get that wind turbine back up here so i can get excited about this. i represent some of the biggest wind resource areas in the nation.

i was out there towering one day with one of the three -- touring one day with one of the three companies that operate in the area, the blades are whiter than the length of a football field, it's going round and round, it's generating electricity and i said, where is it made? and the executive looks at me and said, well, -- i said, no, no, where's it made? he said, well, the tower is made in korea. oh. how about the blades? well, the blades are coming from europe. i said, what about the generator and all of the electronics? well, it's not made here, it's either made in china or it's made in europe. and i told them, i said, what's wrong with that story? and he said, well, you know, that's where it's made. i said, you're receiving serious taxpayer subsidies to build those, to put those towers in place and you are subsidizing china.

do you think that's right? he goes, well, and i said, i'm going to promise you this, i'm going to go back to washington and i'm going to introduce legislation that says, in the green technologies, all of those subsidies, all of those tax subsidies for putting the system on top of your roof, for building a huge giant solar thermal system or a biofuels of all kinds and of course the wind turbines, if you want that tax subsidy, it's going to be made in america or else you'll get no tax subsidy. those are our tax dollars, those tax dollars are going to be spent on americanmade equipment. and he said, well i, i don't think we can do -- well, i don't think we can do it. i said, your choice. if you don't want the subsidy, you can buy it from china but if you want a subsidy you're going to buy americanmade equipment. that bill is introduced. it's going to move because democrats understand american taxpayer money, whether it's building a sanitation system or a water system or paying for a

wind turbine, those are going to be made in america. ms. sutton: or a bridge or a highway. we want those -- we want this to all be made in america. these are taxpayer dollars, the taxpayers expect it to happen. we need to do this work when it needs to be done, but we need to do it with the american workers and american businesses having the chance to make it america. i just want to say to my friend from wisconsin, i know what he's trying to convey in his remarks, but, you know, the american people, they are facing great challenges, right? and that's what you're reflecting in your comments and i have to tell you that i still think that this honor that i have to serve here, i don't think it's painful. i think it's a privilege and i

think it's an honor and i know that the gentleman thinks the same thing about his service in this house. because when people are facing the unfair competition that they're facing, the policies that are working against them instead of with them, the cheating that goes on with currency manipulation and unfair practices, all of those things that are happening, we are here in this moment and we have the chance to change it for them and it matters the most. so i am very excited about being here, fighting forward, not fighting back, but fighting forward to make sure that we make it in america, by strengthening u.s. manufacturing at every turn in ways that make sense for our country, our people. we know we need to manufacture here also because our national security requires us to make things in america.

and i'll yield to the gentleman. mr. kagen: i certainly appreciate my colleague's comments and i couldn't agree with her more. that what we're talking about is our national security. if you don't make anything, you won't have anything. if we don't have a viable economy, we cannot defend ourselves with our military. so we need to manufacture things in america, if, for nothing else, for our national security, and i yield back. mr. garamendi: we have about 10 minutes left and i'd like to bring us back really to where we started or where i started this discussion and that is for the first 18 months the strategy of the democratic party in this house, in the senate and with president obama, has been to stabilize the american economy. let me go back to this. let's review what was happening. beginning in december of 2007, the last two years of the george

w. bush administration, the american economy slid into a recession. it became the greatest recession in america's recent history, since the great depression of the 1930's. by december of 2008 and january of 2009 the last months -- 2009, the last months of the bush administration, we were losing over 700,000 jobs, 750,000 jobs a month. president obama came in and my two colleagues here, i was not yet in congress, having just joined last november, you put through the stimulus bill, the american recovery and reinvestment act. it stabilized, it stopped the slide. and people began to go back to work. with the largest tax -- middle class tax cut ever in america's history, the largest middle class tax cut ever in american history. major investments in infrastructure.

the end result after 18 months was 2.8 million americans working that otherwise would have been out of work or had gone back to work. 2.8 million americans. and we see that here. we see the improvement, the monthly reduction in the number of people losing jobs so that by this year, 2010, after one year of the stimulus program, and other programs that were all voted on by democrats with virtually no republican support, we began to see job growth. not enough. not nearly enough. we now are shifting gears. we're into the second half. we've stabilized the first half, we've reaped some improvement and now, now it's the second half. and the second half, manufacturing matters. this is the heart, the soul, the strength of the american economy and it is where the middle class makes it. happens to be, as you so eloquently pointed out, dr.

kagen, it's where the middle class lost. when those manufacturing jobs were shipped overseas, middle class lost. we will make it in america when we manufacture once again in america. and both of my colleagues here have laid out some very important elements. one is the international competition. and i'd like dr. kagen, if you could review with us the international competition and the disadvantage, both hands tied behind the american manufacturers' back, dr. kagen. mr. kagen: we're beginning to build a better nation, we're beginning to put people back to work, there's a great deal of work to do. but our trade deals have to be balanced. where i come from people don't want fair trade or free trade, they want it to be balanced. and if china's sending us a ship with $50 million worth of goods that they've produced and unloading it for sale here in

the united states, then they should purchase from our manufacturers, from our workers, $50 million worth of goods again to take back to their country. we have to balance our trade deals. but it's hard to balance a trade deal. when the country manipulates its currency and begins with a 20% to 40% price advantage, just because they're cheating on the price of their money. . a free ride for several years. it's hard to have a balanced trade deal that benefits the chinese government's corporations. when you understand there is no difference, i don't know of a single company that can defeat a government, especially one that is manipulating their currency. they have to buy china policy. we have to have a level playing field and it begins by

manufacturing, getting our manufacturers tax advantages they need to create american jobs for american workers. for too lock, for too long, the american tax policy has been to reward the wealthy, not those who are working. if you reward workers, we can balance our trade deals and keep people in our own homes and solve our housing crisis and have a positive future. mr. garamendi: before i yield, i want to pick up that tax policy. american tax policy set by both democrats and republicans, gave an advantage to you and i that would off-- offshore american jobs, 14.5 billion a year. the end of those credits came to the floor a month ago on a piece of legislation that would end

those tax breaks that american corporations have for offshoring jobs. the democrats voted to move that to the senate. not one republican voted for ending those despicable tax breaks that the corporations have. there is the difference. for whom do you fight? the the gentlewoman from ohio started talking about how we might use our tax money more wisely. bring us back to the reality of what's going on in your district and how this would benefit your district. >> the taxpayers in my district and the businesses and workers there and across this country, i believe, expect that when we use those tax dollars, that we use it to buy things and build things in america. this is about their money and making sure we put it to work

for them by putting them to work, not about shifting the money to foreign countries so that they can produce the product there and then ship them back over here. so today, something very important happened and was passed. it's called the end the trade deficit act, so to put a mark on this. you know, our trade deficit has continued to grow for all of the reasons that we talked about. and our trade deficit increased to 42.3 billion, up from the previous month. and the deficit with china alone in may was 22.3 billion, up from $9.3 billion in april. this make it in america program and it's not a flash in the pan, this is an ongoing mission that we are on because we are going

to revitalize u.s. manufacturing and we are going to stand up for u.s. manufacturing against unfair competition. you know, the issue of currency manipulation, we have to -- when we come back, i urge everyone and i know you guys are on board to bring the bill that is part of make it in america called the currency manipulation, end currency manipulation, end chinese currency manipulation to the house floor for a vote so we can see who wants to stand with u.s. manufacturing. and i'm fairly those on this side of the aisle are prepared to do it. i think we have some on the other side of the aisle who are prepared to do it, but it is so critically important that we do take all of these steps on this

multi-faceted mission that we're on to make sure that our businesses and workers get a fair shake because we know when they do, it strengthens our economy, it strengthens our national security and our folks will be able to make it in america. mr. garamendi: how correct you are and we would reach out to our republican colleagues and ask them to join us in making it in america. we have had enough of our tax dollars shipped overseas to manufacture buses, to buy trains and ferries. our tax dollars need to be spent at home, if it's a water system or sanitation system, make it in america. if it's our tax dollars, let's use it to make our future energy supplies. it's our mission in the second half of this session to make it in america. i yield back the remaining time. the speaker pro tempore: under

the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the gentleman from georgia, mr. graves, is recognized as the designee of the minority leader. mr. graves: thank you, mr. speaker. and i guess i rise at an appropriate time to follow the dial owing we just heard and i'm here in my 44th day here in the house of representatives and it seems like on each and every day i have heard the other side of the aisle do nothing but blame the previous administration for the failings of today. and it is my hope at some point they will begin taking responsibility for some of the policy actions. but what we're here to talk

about tonight are positive solutions. we have heard a lot of blaming and name-calling over the past several weeks and we are here tonight to talk about positive solutions about some of the difficult challenges. to the colleagues, we are here to call your bluff. i have some good gentlemen that are going to join me. we are going to talk about the kitchen table solution and as you may have heard, we have had a program here where we have been going out and seeking solutions from the american people, not from our leadership, not from a political party, but from the american people. and it's called america speaking out and there have been more than 12,000 specific ideas generated from the american people, more than 600,000 votes cast as to what is most important. the top concerns from the kitchen table all across america, number one jobs. and we have been saying where are the jobs.

number two, spending and then health care, obamacare. that's what we are going to talk about tonight. as we move through this, there are colleagues that will join me and my good colleague from georgia, mr. gingrey and mr. thompson from pennsylvania. but first, we're going to talk about the number one issue facing america, jobs, job creation. we have a few quotes here. one, this is just from last year, it says our stimulus plan likely will save or create three to four million jobs, 90% of these jobs will be created in the private sector, the remaining 10% are mainly in the public sector jobs. the private sector has lost nearly eight million jobs since 2008. the government has gained 656 ,000 jobs. they were created in the public

sector. and then let's see, estimated unemployment without the stimulus would be 8.8% this year. well, with all of the stimulus bailouts, buyouts, cash for clunkers, unemployment in may was 9.7%, far exceeded their expectations. the plans are not working. what have been the job killers? excessive taxation, insufficient liquidity, economic uncertainty and red tape and government mandates. over the last year, we have seen nearly double-digit unemployment. the debt is continuing to grow. we have a job-killing agenda. and according to the national federation of independent businesses, one in six small businesses are concerned about the uncertainty of the future. 15 million people out of jobs, out of work right now, unemployment at its highest rate in 25 years and the private

sector again has lost eight million jobs. stimulus, that was creating all the jobs. that was going to take care of america. well, i think about stimulus and health care and all that we saw last year and it brought americans to the national capitol last year. if you remember on september 12, americans from all over this nation rode on buses and flew on airplanes to celebrate or speak out against what has been done and we know the american people are not happy right now. what is coming up next? 2011, five months away, under the leadership here in congress, we will see taxes go up on each and every american. we heard, middle-class tax cuts just a few minutes ago. there isn't going to be middle -class tax cut. the tax rate goes up for every american. every individual tax bracket

goes up. we have a marriage penalty. the parent-child tax credit will be cut in half. it is a tax increase. and then farmers, small business owners will see 55% tax increase or their tax rate go up to 55% on the states. and capital gains and dividend taxes will rise as a result of the leadership here in washington. so much to do, so much to do. good thing is we have positive solutions. that's what we are here to talk about tonight. my good friend, mr. thompson from pennsylvania, is a good leader on job creation. and has been working hard in that area and love to have you join us if you like to share with us positive solutions to get americans back to work and does that include private or public sector jobs? mr. thompson: i thank my friend for coordinating this hour.

very important hour. it's about real solutions, not just the types of policies we have seen over the past 19 months, which has grown the size of government, bloated the size of government. we have increased the deficit to the point that what what we have is a legacy of debt. there isn't a generation that ever wants to have it so -- you always want to leave this country better than what we found it, to pass it on to our children and grandchildren. yet, with the trend that we have been on, with the leadership or the lack of leadership from our colleagues across the aisle in terms of the taxing, spending and borrowing, what we have today for the generations to follow us is a tremendous legacy. and the data that just recently came out showed the deficit pushing $14 trillion. $14 trillion.

but you know what? there are better ways. we have been working on these. these aren't new ideas. we have bills that we have introduced. unfortunately the speaker has control over what bills get to the floor. we have many solutions. what i call as oppose todd big government solutions, we have been working on true solutions that would stimulate the economy and get moving on those. many of those have to do with what the true economic engine is in this country and that economic engine is small business. over 20 million small business in this country, those are the folks that take risk and work six seven days a week. many times they do it without taking a dollar back for themselves, keep reinvesting jobs and they are trying to live

that dream and what we have seen in the past 19 months is this government, the obama administration, speaker pelosi just crushing those dreams. and back home, i described if the economy is a football game, there are yellow flags flying everywhere. a former colleague here, dick armey described it, it was a great description and i repeat it often, if the economy is a horse race and if the economy is the horse, then government is the jockey, at whatever point the jockey becomes larger than the horse, you know you have problems. and that is what we have today. we have been trying to reduce the cost for small businesses. and it's been very challenging to do with the folks that we have here. one of the -- just to share one

bill that i have been working on and introduced sometime ago and that was to allow individuals, entrepreneurs who have this vision, have this american dream, be able to take some money and take that money into a tax-deferred savings account and allows them to do it on a regular basis and build that amount of money up so whatever point, they got the dream and know what they want to do, when they accumulate enough of tax-deferred savings, they can purchase maybe physical property, maybe resources, equipment, capital they need to start that business, be able to stimulate a new business that grows, grows jobs. that's just one of obviously, i think, thousands of ideas that we have been working on as a republican conference. we are often accused that we are

the party of no, n-o. that is partially true. we are the party of k-n-o-w. we have great ideas. and we are listening to the american people. and america is speaking out and the fact that we are here as servants, and we are here to work for the american people and we want a dialogue and we are communicating with the people we work for. and america speaking out is a great out. it allows americans from coast to coast to do that. and to me, that is important to look forward to that. . mr. graves: the main thing they've been saying is, where are the jobs? we know just in the last year there have been 2 1/2 million jobs lost here in the united

states. so, you know, a great admittance to that is the fact that the democrats were pushing through the expansion or the extension of the unemployment benefits. so if in fact their policies were to work or were working there would be no need to extend unemployment benefits. but the truth, is they had to extend it because the policies aren't working. let's give you some simple facts here real quick. i'm a finance major. you know, the problem's not that difficult. the challenges are certainly great, but the facts are simple. there's a commonsense equation here. we have total employers in the united states, about 24 million, unemployment rate's 94 million. we have about 14.6 million unemployed americans right now. so there's a simple equation and that is, if one in three businesses hiffer justify -- hire just one employee over the next year, unemployment, the rate would be 4.4%. so that gets it to reasonable, sensible, easy to understand

ideas. so here's the equation. one in three businesses, one new hire and the next -- in the next 12 month, unemployment is down to 4.4%. the question is, how do businesses get to this point where they hire that next person? because right now they're not doing it. and there's a reason for that. it's called uncertainty. and the uncertainty of what is going to happen to them next. i think he know what the teaks tax increases that are coming, things like that are certainly scaring businesses. so what are some of the solutions, the broader solutions is getting government out of the way of job creation, fighting the efforts here, you know, that we've seen as pushing through the largest tax increase in the history of this country is coming in five months and yet today, here tonight, right before us, stood mens of the other party saying, middle class tax cuts, that's not what's happening in five months the largest tax increase in the history of this nation. we need to return to spending levels that were from the 2008

levels and then roll back taxes and, you know, we often hear them say, oh, those big corporate tax breaks, well, guess who hires americans? businesses. wouldn't it be sensible to relieve them of some of the tax burdens here in the united states instead of increasing taxes like they're going to do? and then of course rolling back the regulatory burdens that we see. there's so much to do. so much to do. but we heard them a few minutes ago say, well, the republicans have voted against these job creation packages. well, i don't know that any of those packages have been successful. and so it's probably a good thing that republicans have voted against them. but the fact is, they have a majority that is far greater than the republicans. they can push through anything that they want to push through. and they've certainly being done that against the well -- been doing that against the will of the american people. thank you for joining us. mr. gohmert: i love having new congressman here that's so good at math. and so the question is, since we

have heard repeatedly that the majority wants to have a green economy like that in spain and now we have heard from spain that it turns out they're having to abandon their green effort, their green economy, because they've determined that every time they created one green job they lost two regular jobs in the economy. so i was just wondering, if the gentleman from george could make the calculation and tell us how long it would take us to get to the 4% unemployment rate if we lose two jobs for every one job the majority creates under their green plan. mr. graves: i think weet be going backward as little bit. you're right. the fact is, we need to empower the business community. we need to embrace the

entrepreneurial spirit. we need to equip them with lower burdens on regulation, lower tax rates, and we do not need to be creating jobs as a government. instead we need to private -- the private sector creating jobs. there's only so many employees in the united states and if more of them are shifting to the public sector it's only taking intellectual capital and wealth out of the private sector. i'd love to turn it over to my colleague from georgia, dr. gingrey, thank you for joining us on this late evening. mr. gingrey: mr. speaker, i thank the gentleman from ranger in gordon county. almost my district. we have congressional districts and we have the privilege actually of sharing gordon county. the gentleman from ranger, representative graves, has done a great job in a short period of time, mr. speaker, in the house of representatives and he knows of what he speaks. i mean, this is the kind of work

that he did in the georgia house of representatives and represented us extremely well at the state level. it's really interesting to see him on the floor of the house of representatives now and to explain to the american people and our colleagues, mr. speaker, what truly is going on here. he and i had the privilege, i guess you could say, of the previous hour, watching our colleagues from the democrat majority, it seems, mr. speaker, that they spent an hour whining about competition from other countries, particularly china. they wanted to focus in on china and say that, you know, all these unfair trade practices and what china's doing in regard to their currency and dumping and all of these things that you'd think that was indeed no world trade organization could police anything. but it was all, you know, just a blame.

a whole hour of blaming other countries for the woes that we have in our country. and the fact that as representative graves pointed out that we have an unemployment rate of 10% and 16 million people out of work, i even heard from the other side of the aisle, mr. speaker, the representative from wisconsin, the distinguished dr. kagen say that that the problem is that the economic stimulus package of february, 2009, of $862 billion, that's right, with a b, was not enough. that they just simply didn't pour enough money into this problem and of course we all know on this side of the aisle, we conservative republicans, are going to continue to fight this plan the democratic majority has of just spending more money. you cannot spend your way out of

debt. every family in this country understands that and understands it very clearly. the problem and we'll talk about this in the hour and in the ensuing hour as we proceed with the colloquy, but as representative graves points out, mr. speaker, the problem is not them, the problem is us. we can blame all we want to other countries for our own woes, we can blame greece we can blame spain. they spent an hour blaming china. but how about blaming our tax policy that has a corporate tax rate of 35%, one of the highest rates of any industrialized country, while all the other countries of western europe are lowering the corporate tax rate? we just leave it alone. we don't do anything about it. and as the gentleman from calhoun and gordon county just

said, we are about to let, not we, but you, mr. speaker, the democratic majority, are about to let the bush tax cuts expire. representative graves talks about marginal rates. he didn't have a chance yet, i'm sure he will, to get into the estate tax, to letting the dividend, instead of being 15% tax on dividends, to let it go up to the marginal rate, indeed up to 39.6%. and let capital gains go back up from 10% or 15% to 20%. these are the job killers. all of these regulations, union wages, giving them special deals, paying them, in many instances, far more and indeed even letting them work federal jobs and negotiate union activities while they're supposed to be working for the taxpayer. i could go on and on but i want

to yield back to the gentleman controlling the time and look forward to my colleagues as we go through this hour. mr. graves: let's take a quick glance at where we are from a perspective financially and then the positive solution of balancing the budget. imagine that. balancing the budget, balancing the checkbook here at the federal government. here's the truth of where we are and we heard earlier when our friends from the other side were talking about how good it was since the new administration has taken over. well, here's some facts. the facts don't lie. i mean, the truth is that the deficits under this current administration and leadership has just blossomed tremendously since they've taken charge. now, we've heard a lot, in my 44 days i've heard so much about president bush, president bush, the last eight years, his administration. but you know what? i think they've had a little bit of amnesia because they took the majority in 2006, swore in their

speaker in 2007 and look what happened from that point forward. the deficit bloomed. and unemployment increased. it all works together simultaneously but yet they want to look back over the full decade and forget that, you know what? they're responsible. they were in a governing position and yet they don't want to accept the responsibility of governing. so that leads us to where we are right now. at a point of lack of governing because for the first time since 1974 no budget has been presented here and the question is, where's the budget? right here you can read the quote, it says, skipping a budget resolution this year would be unprecedented. and we've seen a lot of unprecedented things over the last several months but this in itself is unprecedented. the house has never failed to pass an annual budget resolution since the current budget rules were put into place in 1974. and that's reported here back in april.

but budgets are necessary, according to the leadership here. steny hoyer, our current majority leader, said, enacting a budget was the most basic responsibility of governing. that was the year they took over. the year they took over and since then look what's happened. and then of course from the house budget committee chairman, if you can't budget, you can't governor got -- govern. right there it is. well, that leads us to today. i believe that it's time to let the american people know that we have solutions to balance the budget. and actually have a proposal in place. and that, i can tell the american people, hasn't got a hearing. i wonder why. i wonder why. h.con.resolution 281 which is, i know, many of the colleagues here have signed onto it, and not sure if one would want to speak to it in its specifics, but provides tax relief, returns to 2008 spending levels, makes

no changes to the social security flaws as they currently are, provides spending increases equivalent to the inflation growth in medicare and medicaid, requires each committee in this house to find savings equal to 1% of the mandatory spending, repeals the troubled asset relief program, tarp, repeals tarp, repeals obamacare, and then also provides medical liability reform, some other things, freedom of purchase health care across state lines, repeals davis-bacon. great concepts there. i'm sure you'd like to speak to some of those and the needs, the importance of balancing a budget here in the united states congress. mr. gohmert: i appreciate my new friend for yielding. and going back to a comment from good dr. gingrey from georgia about the $862 billion stimulus

package, because i know he recalls and others recall that c.b.o. told us that it was a $787 billion stimulus package. and lo and behold we get here a year later and they say, oh, you know what? we blew it by about 15%. we just blew it. most statistical analysis say, it's within the margin of error, 2% to 4%. not with c.b.o. here. we can boil it 25% in this case, 15% or so. whoops. in a year's time we were $100 billion off the mark. . . 10:45. 10:45. that points out how

irresponsible things have gotten and you look at the numbers and find out that c.b.o. has been a willing ally, complicit in what's going on. they told the country, ok, this ridiculous health care bill that's going to bankrupt the country, we are finding they are starting to tell people we are going to ration your care and by the way, it's going to cost $250 billion. we misplaced the numbers somehow because if we had found them before the bill came for a vote people said they wouldn't vote for it if it was more than $1 trillion. what difference does another $250 billion make when you are putting us in debt to $1 trillion. c.b.o. misplaced $250 billion

until after it passed and within a matter of a couple of months they found it. we are in trouble. we need to get rid of c.b.o. and get an independent group, whether it's moody's that can do an adequate statistical analysis. but the games that are being played with jobs would be come call if it weren't representing real people hurting, real people hurting. i proposed a year and a half ago, instead of spending $1 trillion and we were told we would be spending up to $9 trillion and you would let everybody in america forego paying any income tax for a year. let people keep their own money and they would jump-start this economy. and what our friends across the aisle are saying, no, no, no, our friends across the aisle

want to give tax cuts and allow the lower rates only to go to the wealthy because the way they identify it, the 53% of adult americans that will pay all of the income tax this year, they consider to be the wealthy. and what they are saying is, the republicans want to give tax relief to the only people paying the taxes. we on our side of the aisle, we want to give tax relief to the people who aren't paying any tax. it's another name, redistribution of the wealth, it means those who have not been able to earn anything will have money taken away from those who earned it and give it to those who didn't. we have to help those who can't help themselves, but we do not need to become a government that becomes what i saw as a judge,

the government lures people into a rut and give them know hope, no way out, just feeding them little unemployment checks, a little check here and there with a little rut. time to blow the lid off the thing and small businesses create jobs. small businesses are the ones that need the tax cuts. they certainly don't need the biggest tax increase increase that is coming in january. they are the ones that will create the hope for creating the jobs. i hope and pray we will be able to help the small businesses create the jobs instead of just doling these censor worker jobs is all that happened in june.

and i yield back to my friend from georgia. mr. graves: what is so exciting about this america speaking out program. we are getting ideas from americans that are sitting around the kitchen table and talking about what they would do if they were in charge and making these decisions. as they are watching the tv and oftentimes discussing what comes out of washington, d.c., the ideas they have proposed and the thousands of connections that have been made. and i took that to my district. and someone implemented a program much like that and developed an economic advisory council of business and community leaders from each and every county in my district to tear down that wall because washington hasn't been listening. we took that wall down and we said we want your ideas and present them to the full house as the ideas from main street

itself, not from capitol hill, but we need the hills from north georgia or where the ideas come from. but balancing the budget is a great start. every american family has to balance their checkbook, but right now, here as leading by example, a terrible example of the federal government that is so far outside of its bounds with deficit spending and increasing its debt, it's unsustainable. the republicans have a solution right here. house conress -- house concurrent resolution, every family is cutting spending out of their personal budget but here on the federal level, spending, spending, spending. mr. thompson, looks like you had something good to add.

mr. thompson: i want to come back to one word that describes what is suppressing jobs, what is killing jobs and killing jobs from being created and that is uncertainty. uncertainty is the direct result of all the policies we have seen piled upon the american economy in the past 19 months. and as i travel around in my district, just like you do, you talk with the job creators and the people who take the risk, and every year take their profits, that's not a bad word. that's how we have grown this wonderful nation on the backs of entrepreneurs and small businessmen and women, and they take their profits and re-invest it back in their company and add a product line or build a new site or hire people. they aren't doing it right now. they are sitting on the side lines and as a direct result of

the terrible policies. you know when i think over the past 19 months and i'm in my first term here, how many times have taxes been raised? we are looking at the largest tax increase ever that's looming and we should talk more about that but we should not lose sight of the fact that taxes have been raise dollars on these small businesses. my colleagues on the other side would say well, we only tax the wealthy, those folks that made $00 -- $22 -- $200,000. those are small businesses. they are organized as a limit liability corporation or s corporation. they pay those taxes as

individuals and out of that maybe $200,000 that they generate, they are paying a payroll and providing sustaining jobs. and you know, i have lost count of how many times they have raised those taxes on those folks since january, 2009. and you talked about the largest tax increase ever, you know, beginning -- and this has been my fear all along. 2010 -- 2009 was a really tough year. 2010 is a tough year. but it's almost likeance that has been applied. this government money has been thrown at people and unemployment has gone down but a lot of that were temporary government sector jobs that drove down unemployment. never down much less than 10%. but it took the edge off.

my greatest fears, we are going off the cliff because these new regulations, tripled the size of the environmental protection agency and i refer to them as the excessive punishment agency. and on top of that, the things you talked about, the largest tax increase $3.8 trillion. what would that be? the marriage penalty is going to return. child tax dread is going to go down to half. the death tax which i think -- double taxation. it's just, put a tax on somebody's death. mr. graves: you are talking about the marriage tax. those are the people, the wealthy married people or all married people? it's everyone.

mr. thompson: everybody. mr. graves: those with children are those getting the penalty, ones who are the wealthy or everyone? mr. thompson: everyone. mr. graves: the fact that they stood over here 40 minutes ago and said, these are tax cuts for the middle class, it's not the case. the largest tax increase will occur in five months and there is a bill to block that tax increase and to allow the taxes to remain at the level they are today and we want to see them lowered, but it's not a tax cut. we are saying keep it at the level it is, don't raise them. they are raising taxes. let's finish this balance the checkbook in a minute. republicans, we are saying let's cut spending. stop thr excessive spending that's going on here in

washington. we can do that by repealing the unused portions of the stimulus bill. they have talked about how great it is. when a third hasn't been spent, which means it's not working. we need to end the bailouts and of course, the big one, repeal obamacare which is $600 billion tax increase on all americans and businesses all over the united states. mr. gingrey: if the gentleman would yield. that is nine zeros. if you don't mind, have the gentleman put that america speaking out poster so our colleagues can look at it and i was thinking about our colleagues from the majority side of the aisle who had the previous hour, there was a member from ohio, a member from wisconsin and a member from california.

and i'll just bet you, mr. speaker, if the folks in those great states will take the opportunity of going on that website www.americaspeakingout .com and input what their concernsr it would probably mirror what is on that poster that representative graves is presenting this evening in regards to cutting spending, repeal the stimulus, $86 billion. the representative from wisconsin said that wasn't enough spending. we need to spend more. mr. graves: do not go to americaspeakingout.com. don't go to that website and say increase spending and increase the stimulus or continue the bailouts or keep obamacare.

they said stop all that stuff. mr. gingrey: if the gentleman would yield. i would say that -- mr. speaker, you are right on target. and he said a keyword and that is that this is a nonpartisan website. yes, it is created by the republican minority for all of america to let us know, whether they be democrats, republicans, independents, libertarians, whatever. let them have the opportunity to tell us and let's have a bubble up from the bottom contract with america not a top-down driven by the government plan that it seems that the democratic party is bent and determined to force on the american people just as they forced cap and trade, an energy policy that r