very careful members making certain when they change the rules that you know what happens. and i'm prepared to say, i'm sorry for any embarrassment that has caused. another issue has to do with having an office, a congressional office in the building that i live in. . people say that's taking advantage, rent control, stabilized apartment. nobody has said that the ethics committee never found for stabilized apartment. no one said i broke any laws. no one said that the apartment that they considered two had always been considered one at the least. no one said that 10 years ago there was an apartment, one bedroom apartment that i got

from my family, political friends, i no longer have. but the concern was how do you explain the congressional office? let's read the lapped lord's testimony. he said he was 20% vacant. that he needed money. that he knew that the checks were paid by the congressional committee. that the mail came in rangel for congress. and that the lawyers have told him and the officials of the city and state of new york that there was no violation of any law or rules. and what was the benefit? the benefit was that your colleague and friend was not sensitive to the fact that there was appearance as though i was being treated differently than anyone else. but the landlord said he didn't treat me any differently. no one said that they did treat me differently. but i have to admit that i

wasn't sensitive to anything because i never felt then that i was treated any differently than anybody else. so that ends the apartment thing. but i plead guilty of not being sensitive. now when it comes to the negligence of the disclosures and the tax issues, there's absolutely no excuse that's there. when accusations were made, i hired a forensic accountant and told them to check out what the heck is going on because i want to make certain that when i stand up and speak that it's true. well, after i found out it was far more serious than the accusations, i then referred it to the ethics committee. it wasn't as though someone tracked me down, the i.r.s. or

the clerk of the house, i filed the correct papers. and the tax that is were paid -- taxes that were paid an accountant might say that had my accountant recognized that this 2,000 down payment for a house in the dominican republic that was promised to be paid off in seven years would be a complete failure, and if indeed they did not give me one nickel but whenever they thought they were making a dollar or two they reduced the mortgage, then there's no question you don't have to be a tax expert to know that if you didn't report that income, that was -- notwithstanding the fact if you had done the right thing you had no liability bass the taxes that were paid -- because the tax that is were paid to the dominican republic would have been deducted and with depreciation i would have no liability. having said that, is that an excuse that's worthy? of course not. the fact that there was

negligence on the part of the person that for 20 years did it and the fact that i signed it, does not really give an excuse as to why i should not apologize to this body for not paying the attention to it that i should have paid to it. but there is no, not one scintilla bit of evidence that the negligence involved in the disclosures, that there was some way to hide from the public what i had. because the value of the property they would say was $25,000, 100,000, whatever it would be that it didn't make any sense that i was trying to disclose 2 -- it. why did i take the floor today? i haven't found one lawyer that said i should do it. i haven't found one friend that said i should do it.

but i thought about it. if the lawyers are going to continue to charge me, and i don't even know when the hearing's going to be, and i can't tell them i want one and not six lawyers, i don't want to offend the ethics committee. they are doing the best they can. but, hey, i'm in a position -- the speaker pro tempore: members and their staff will please take their conversations from the floor. the gentleman may resume. mr. rangel: that, hey, i'm 0 years old. all my life has been from the beginning public service. that's all i have ever done. been in the army, been a state legislator, been a federal prosecutor, 40 years here. and all i'm saying is that if it is the judgment of people here for whatever reason that i resign, then have the ethics committee expedite this.

don't leave me swinging in the wind until november. if this is an emergency and i think it is, to help our local and state governments out, what about me? i don't want anyone to feel embarrassed, awkward. if i was you i may want me to go away, too. i am not going away. i am here. and i do recognize that -- i'm not saying there's any partisanship in this because if i do all the people that have been accused of accusations, i'm in a close district, and i -- they were republicans, i would give a couple of moments of thought to see whether or not, especially if i didn't have anything to work with to get re-elected, i would say, hey, take a look at these republicans. they have been accused. but i don't really think that the unfairness of this is to

me. i don't take it personally. i'm thinking about all of you. the president wants dignity. let's have dignity in this house where the ethics committee means something and that none of you, if the newspapers say anything, will have to wait two years before you can say, no comment. even in addition to that -- and in addition to that, once they make the accusation, they have no business making any mistakes and saying that i didn't cooperate. i got papers with my signature on it. i got papers that said i tried my darnest. i got papers where my lawyer tells me had ever reason to believe that the full committee would sign on, that there was space for people to sign. i'm the only one -- i don't know what changed their minds about settling this case. but my lawyers -- my friends

say don't go to the floor. and i say what are you going to do me? suppose i do get emotional? suppose i do think of my life the beginning and end. are you going to expel me from this boddy? are you going to say while there is no evidence that i took a nickel, asked for a nickel that there's no sworn testimony, no conflict that i have to leave here? as much as i love you, democrats are thinking it would be easy, i'm the guy that was raising money, but that doesn't mean that i criticize you for saying, hey, that's crate then but i'm running for re-election now. do what you have to do. and republicans, hey, you don't have much to run on, but you know, but what the hell, if rangel is an embarrassment,

based on newspaper articles, i can see why you would do it, but think, think. isn't this historically the first time that it appears as though partisanship is in the ethics committee? isn't historically the first time that the recommendations of the subcommittee of investigation is turned down? and darn, who in the heck would want somebody who politically call you corrupt to be the ranking bipartisan guy to judge you? i don't expect answers today. and i know you're going home. i wish all of you -- but at the end of the day somebody, somebody has to do more than wish i go away. somebody has to tell me, when does rangel get a chance to talk to witnesss? i haven't talked with any member of the ethics committee. i haven't talked -- i mean in terms of settlement. my lawyers have.

i haven't talked with any of the witnesses. and they had to expedite this case. in other words, i have a shorter time to prepare for reasons that they toll me challenge the ethics committee. they make this stuff up i think all along. so my lawyer, i can understand how financially this thing can go on longer than i can afford. but she is willing to assist me in working out something in pro bono and i'll expect the leadership to help me. don't let this happen to you. don't walk away from here because it's convenient that i disappear. because not all of you will be able to withstand it as i have. if there's no issue of corruption, if everybody, including the leader over here, has to start off what a great american i am before he drops the bomb, well, i think that should count for something. i am not asking for leniency , i'm asking for exposure of the

facts. they have made a decision. i want you to make a decision. i apologize to the leadership. i feel for those people, especially newcomers, that love this place so much that like someone said, charlie, they all love you. and i paused, but they love themselves better. i understand that. but for god's sake, just don't believe that i don't have feelings, that i don't have pride. that i do want the dignity that the president had said. and the dignity is that even if you see fit to cause me not to be able to come back because you're not going to do it in my district, but if there's some recommendation that i be expelled, for me, for me that would be dignity.

because it shows openly that the system isn't working for me. and i hope some of you might think if it doesn't work for me, that it may not work for you. so i know we are anxious to get home. i know i can't get on the agenda. i know that sometimes -- some time, somewhere i would have a hearing. while you're saying i should resign, i do hope that you might think about what happens if the whole country starts thinking it's better that you resign and don't make anyone feel uncomfortable than to have the truth at least, a person an opportunity to say, you have made alleged violations. i am saying that you're wrong based on sworn testimony. and i want somebody, and i don't think it's going to be

people who have been critical of me for doing the same thing, that's going to be the judge. i know outside doesn't count because we judge the conduct of our members. erer recall if i can't get my dignity back here, then fire your best shot in getting rid of me through expulsion. now, i apologize for any embarrassment that i have caused. i'm prepared to admit and try to let young people know that you never get too big to recognize that these rules are for junior members as they are for senior members. and that you can't get so carried away with good intentions that you break the rules. the rules are there to make certain that we have some order, some discipline and respect for the rule. and i violated that. and i'm apologizing for it.

and i don't think apologies mean this is a light matter. it's very serious. but corruption? no evidence, no suggestion that this was ever found. and lastly, i close by saying that there is an organization that some of you know, certainly national truth in government, whatever, and the only thing i can say that some of my more important democrats on the list that sent out mail to listening money to get rid of me even before i became the chairman. and they have a website that i will be giving you because they got a lot of members, including bicaucus members on their list. what i do remember is send your money in now. we got rangel against the ropes

and we got to get rid of him. much knows who they are. and they -- everyone knows who they are. they followed me on vacation. they followed me when i was doing business much the airport, outside where i live. it's kind of rough. i'm sensitive to your feelings and the hard work by the ethics committee, but this has to stop sometime. . one year, two years, primaries, elections. and all i'm saying is i deserve and demand the right to be heard. and if i hurt anybody's feeling, believe me, it's the equity and the fairness and the justice that i'm asking for and not your feelings. we are entitled to our political feelings and what we want done, but we have to respect each other, and this institution which i love. i love my country. i love my congress, and there's nothing i wouldn't do to

preserve this from going on. i love the disagreements. i love the debates. i love the arguments. but you're not going to tell me to resign to make you feel comfortable. so to awful those that helped me to help myself, let me appreciate it. and for those that disagree, i'm sorry, but that's one thing you can't take away from me. i hope you have a pleasant time while you're away. maybe, just maybe, the members of the ethics committee might think about telling me when they think they might have a hearing so that whatever they decide i can let my constituents, my families, my friends know that i did the best i could as an american, as a patriot, and someone that loves this country. thank you for your attention. go home.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, proceedings will resume on questions previously postponed. votes will be taken in the following order. ordering the previous question on house resolution h.res. 1606 by the yeas and nays, adoption of house resolution 1606, if ordered. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 50's vote. remaining electronic -- as a 15-minute vote. will he make electronic votes -- remaining electronic votes will be 15-minute votes. the unfinished business is the question on will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 1606. the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: resolution providing for consideration of the senate amendment to the house amendment to the senate amendment to the bill h.r. 1586, to modernize the air

traffic control system, improve the safety, reliability and availability of transportation by air in the united states, provide for modernization of the air traffic control system, re-authorize the federal aviation administration and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on ordering the previous question. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas --

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 244. the nays are 164. the previous question is ordered.

the speaker: the house will come to order. the chair would ask all members to rise for the purpose of a moment of silence. the chair asks that the house now observe a moment of silence in remembrance of our brave men and women in uniform who have given their lives in the service of our nation in iraq and afghanistan and their families and of all who serve in our armed forces and their families.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection five-minute voting will continue. the question is on adoption of the resolution. so many as are in favor say aye . those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device.

this will be a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 229. the nays are 173. the resolution is adopted. without objection, a motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the house will be in order. the house will be in order. members will please take their conversations off the floors and the aisles. for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin seek recognition? mr. obey: madam speaker, pursuant to house resolution 1606, i call up h.r. 1586 with

the senate amendment to the house amendment to the senate amendment thereto and offer the motion at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. designate the senate amendment to the house amendment to the senate amendment and designate the motion. the clerk: h.r. 1586, an act to impose an additional tax on bonuses received from certain tarp recipients. senate amendment, a motion offered by mr. obey of wisconsin. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. members will please remove their conversations from the chamber. the house will be in order. members to my right will please remove their conversations from the chamber. pursuant to house resolution 1606, the motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking member of the

committee on appropriations. the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on ways and means and the chair and chair and ranking member of the committee on energy and commerce. the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. obey, the gentleman from california, mr. lewis, the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, and the gentleman from texas, mr. barton, each will control 10 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from wisconsin, mr. obey. mr. obey: madam speaker, can i have order? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. members will please remove their conversations from the floor. staff will please remove their conversations from the floor. the gentleman is recognized. mr. obey: madam speaker, i yield myself three minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. obey: madam speaker, today we have heard from our friends

on the minority side an ample amount of sarcasm and cynicism and partisan hyperbole mixed in with fiction. i hope we can cut through that today. today we can either sit frozen in the ice of our indifferences, franklin roosevelt once said, or we can take action to help states meet their safety net obligations and to protect our children's education by keep teachers in the classroom while we continue to claw our way back from the most devastating economic crisis since the great depression. last year the first job recovery package we recognized two reasons for providing federal aid to states and school districts. the first was to reduce the human carnage that occurs when we take kids off health care coverage or let their education

suffer because of teacher layoffs. the second was that standing by while states, localities and school boards cut essential investments and services and impose significant new taxes will cripple the ability of the economy to grow and cause additional job weakness in both private and public sectors. it is important, madam speaker, to remember how we got here. the failed economic policies of the previous eight years obliterated budget surpluses inherited from president clinton. federal oversight, the wall street banks was gutted allowing them to morph into casinos and allowing the economy into catastrophic collapse. that produced monthly losses of 750,000 jobs in each of the last three months of the bush administration. we now know that the economic crisis was even deeper and more broad than we initially expected. while the economy has improved,

the effect of the recession are not yet behind us. they are still affecting people's lives and livelihoods. three times before today in december, in may and in july we tried to take additional actions to help the problems and three times we were blocked. now today we have this much-reduced bill to provide $10 billion in funding to save somewhere around 160,000 education jobs and $16 billion in health assistance to the states. our friends in the minority accuse us of including job-killing tax increases to pay for it. that's ridiculous. the bill closes a tax loophole that encourages companies to ship jobs overseas. not only will that help pay for this package, it will fix a hole in the tax code that is rewarding companies for sending american jobs elsewhere.

still, others, including the leadership of the minority, call this a special interest bailout. too bad, i say. since when do we regard america's kids as a special interest group? i yield myself -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. obey: two additional minutes. you don't get a second chance to educate kids. we should not fool ourselves into thinking that this package will do as much as we ought to be doing to ease the squeeze on the national economy. we will impartially offset with this bill the human wreckage caused by the recession, but we will have not done nothing to address the macroreality that the economy is still incredibly weak. this bill will soften the blow of state budget cutbacks, but these very cutbacks will have a negative and neutralizing effect on the federal fiscal

stimulus in the first place. this is a far less dramatic action than that the nation needs to recover from the recession, but this aid is long overdue and the time for arguing has past. the cutback in food stamps in the bill are plain wrong, but face it, the minority party in the senate is using the rules of the senate to give them the functional equivalent of the majority's ability to determine the agenda of that body. and they have decided to follow the rule over rule approach of governance blocking every action they can, and in this case, delaying action to the point of complete confusion. our nation's kids are getting ready to go back to school. they need this help now and adequate as it is, i urge all members to vote yes to give it to them. it's the least we should do. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. lewis: thank you, madam speaker.

madam speaker, states across america have as their number one responsibility the education of our young. if the states cannot allocate their own spending in order to carry out that top responsibility we will never solve the problem of the bailout from uncle sam. a multibillion dollar bailout today will set the stage for nationalized education tomorrow. that will surely push our economy over the cliff of bankruptcy. why are we talking with each other here today? we should be meeting with our constituents, holding town hall meetings and listening to what's on the hearts and minds of our voters. the folks in my district have made their concerns very clear. they're saying, jerry, tell those big spending politicians in washington to stop spending our money. but the democrat majority is so

addicted to spending that they've called congress back just to vote on yet another multibillion dollar bailout. i'm scratching my head because in the past few -- the past few months this congress has done virtually none of the work that the voters sent us here to do. we haven't passed a budget. we haven't funded defense and homeland security. we made our troops wait months before passing funds to support their fight against international terrorism. the majority leadership calls the bill before us a major accomplishment. they hope it will please teachers' unions and inspire the krattic base two months before the -- democratic base two months before the november election. i believe most voters will see it for what it is, further evidence that this congress has a spending problem. to the voters, the 111th

congress will go down in history as the bailout congress . the congress has all right spent $75 billion in stimulus dollars to help states with education. that was supposed to be a one-time temporary bailout approved by the american reinvestment and recovery act. i am very proud of the fact that three of my four children are teachers. they work very hard to provide quality education in the classroom. they know that schools should be run by parents, teachers and local communities. the more we approve these bailouts the more federal government takes over that role. mr. speaker, i know that my democrat colleagues say that this legislation is, quote, fully paid for. on the other hand, the bill spends the entire $26 billion in just two years while the

offsets take place over 10 years. the so-called offsets in this legislation are produced by almost a $10 million billion increase in taxes, $13.4 billion in reductions and two programs that are popular with democrat leaders, that is the food stamp program and renewable energy projects. some democrat leaders have already pledged to restore funding to these programs. some of these so-called cuts could be eliminated as soon as the member in a lame-duck session. mr. speaker, beware of a lame-duck session called by this congress. i want to emphasize this again to my colleagues. the voters do not want us to throw money, more money at our nation's problems. yet, that is exactly what this bill does. it's time, mr. speaker, to put uncle sam on a diet and put an end to the congressional spending spree.

i urge a no vote on this legislation and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. obey: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for wo minutes. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding and i want to thank him for his persistence and pushing this legislation and finally to have this legislation back from the senate today so we can help school districts. mr. miller: the scandals that were permitted under the bush administration cost middle-class families trillions of dollars in the loss of wealth, in their pension plans, in their jobs, in the value of their homes. now, the question is, were there not schoolchildren in this nation be victims of financial scandals that were tolerated and whether or not these school districts that have had the revenues that they rery on to fund the schools that -- rely on to fund the schools that have been ripped away because of the loss of sales tax, because of the loss of income tax, because of the results of those scandals?

the answer to this bill is no, that in fact we should help school districts make sure that children can get a first-class education, that they don't lose a year of education, a year of education because of those financial scandals that happened on the watch of the past administration, as the banks on wall street ran amuck. so we should pass this bill and make sure those 160,000 teachers can return to the classroom. i'd like to ask the gentleman a question. it's my understanding, chairman, under this legislation that when the governor makes application for these funds under the bill the governor -- the secretary can require the governor to choose one of two formulas, the state allocation formula or the title 1 formula and to post that formula so school districts would then be able to know their allocation as soon as possible so they can start to rehire people and start to reduce class sizes or other decisions that school boards hope to make to provide for that education, is that your

understanding that that's permitted under this legislation? mr. obey: that's the committee's intent. mr. miller: so the governor would put that in the application to clear the formula and post that so school districts will be on the earliest possible -- mr. obey: that's the intent. mr. miller: thank you. you sent this bill to the house senate last year. you sent it three times last year. thank you again for your persistence and your work on this issue. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. lewis: madam speaker, i'm proud to yield two minutes to the former chairman of the education committee, now the senior republican on our armed services, buck mckeon of california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. mckeon: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mckeon: i thank the gentleman for yielding. today i rise in opposition to this measure which will increase domestic spending at the expense of national security. specifically, the federal government will spend $10 billion for this teacher bailout paid in part with a

$3.3 billion cut in defense programs. . i can assure you the department of defense has need of these funds, including unfunded requirements related to our operations in iraq and offing. i say this fully aware of the needs of our educational system. as the former chairman and ranking member of education and labor. those in favor of this bill will say that this money was previously identified by the department of defense as unspent and available for higher priorities. but this argument misses two larger points. first, as yesterday's military times observed, diverting money from the defense budget to ed education-education programs would eliminate any opportunity for the defense department or congress to take unobligated money from one defense program to spend on another defense program. second, rescissions to the defense budget this late in the fiscal year are problematic and disruppive to operations.

as the department of defense comp toller has told the armed services committee, this will require the defense restructure or postpone programs and in some cases the money is no longer available in these accounts. finally, i remain concerned that this is the beginning of a slippery slope. the secretary of defense has initiated an ongoing effort to generate $100 billion in savings within the department of defense over the next five years. the only secretary that's been asked to do this. my ultimate concern is that these savings will not be reinvested into america's defense requirements but will be harvested by congressional democrats for new domestic spending and entitlement programs. we see today this is already happening. congressional democrats with the full support of the white house are taking critical defense funding to pay for a bailout. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized.

mr. lewis: madam speaker, i don't see my next speaker here. i'll reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin is recognized. mr. obey: madam speaker, i'm prepared to yield back if the gentleman is. mr. lewis: i'm told my next speaker is on the way. so i've got to continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. -- mr. obey: i'm ready to yield back as soon as the gentleman is.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. lewis: i'm proud to yield one minute to our former chairman of the agriculture committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. the gentleman from virginia. mr. goodlatte: i rise in opposition to this legislation. h.r. 1586, the state bailout bill extends many of the same provisions included in the original stimulus bill by increasing taxes and using questionable offsets. increases in taxes on american businesses, america's job creators by $9.8 billion over 10 years, and these tax increase also kill jobs, reduce american competitiveness, discourage investment, and prevent economic recovery. this is a permanent tax increase on job creators in exchange for a temporary fix for the states. a series of international tax changes in the bill could have

far-reaching consequences on the competitiveness of worldwide american businesses. the national association of manufacturers, quotes, an estimated 22 million people in the united states, more than 19% of the private sector work force and 53% of all manufacturing employees, are employed by companies with operations overseas. this is a very detrimental -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. goodlatte: i urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from wisconsin. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. lewis: madam speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from california, tom mcclintock. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. mr. mcclintock: i thank the gentleman for yielding. madam speaker, this bill ignores the simple truth, government cannot inject a single dollar into the economy that is not first taken out of the same economy. we see the jobs it saved or created when the government puts the money back in, but we don't see directly are the jobs

lost or prevented when the government first takes that money out of the economy. those lost jobs are seen in chronic unemployment rates and stagnant job market despite unprecedented government spending. nor is this necessary to save teaching jobs. a school board faced with a choice between a couple of good teachers and overpaid bureaucrat is probably going to keep the teachers and fire the bureaucrat. but this bill says it doesn't have to make that choice. indeed, this actually prohibits school boards from doing anything that would reduce their spending below last year's level. madam speaker, it's time to invoke the first law, when you are in the rut, stop digging. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. obey: could i inquire how many speeblingers the gentleman has? -- speakers the gentleman has? mr. lewis: i have no additional speaker and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from wisconsin. mr. obey: madam speaker, i would simply say yes, this bill spends money.

yes, it saves money. it saves more than it spends to the tune of $1.3 billion, according to c.b.o. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair is now prepared to recognize the members of the committee on energy and commerce who control time. the gentleman from california, mr. waxman, and the gentleman from texas, mr. barton, each control 10 minutes. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: madam speaker, i yield myself one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. waxman: i rise in vong support of this bill for education, jobs, and medicaid assistance. this will provide clinical relief of the states and local governments. this is a vote for jobs, their education, for health care. the states and local governments are faced with a decrease of income or taxes as people have lost their jobs.

and yet in the medicaid area there is an increase for services as some people have lost their insurance. this will help the states avoid the massive cuts in medicaid eligibility, benefits, and payments to providers. the federal medicaid assistance program was adopted in february of 2009. it expires in december. this will extend our temporary fmap program for a-- an additional six months through june 30, 2011 when most state fiscal years end. there will be no change in the current formula for targeting additional fiscal relief, and with high unemployment rates. i urge support for this legislation and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. barton: madam speaker, i would ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. barton: i yield myself three minutes.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. barton: i thank the gentlelady. i'm sorry, madam speaker, that we have to be here today to spend money that the taxpayers don't have, that congress can't afford for an economic stimulus program that doesn't work. the provision that's in the jurisdiction of the energy and commerce committee is the medicaid assistance program. specifically called fmap. this is a program to help low-income constituents in a cost share between the state government and federal government. spending on this program over the last two fiscal years has gone up almost 50%. the stimulus package that was enacted last year increased it an additional 6%, i believe, through december of this year. the bill before us would extend that extension until june of next year. there is no emergency in this program.

there is no pending financial catastrophe in medicaid. there is a long-term unfunded mandate, obviously, but in the short term this is not something that has to be done. the $16 billion that would be spent on this program ostensibly is to be spent for medicaid, low-income, health care assistance, but if you read the fine print, it doesn't have to. as we all know, madam speaker, money is fungible. and under this particular bill while it -- the nameplate says for medicaid the truth is the money can be spent for whatever purpose the state wants to spend it for. i don't think that's appropriate. we on the republican side were prepared to offer an amendment in rules committee last evening that would have at least said if you are going to save the money for medicaid, it actually has to be spent for medicaid.

we were told that no amendment would be made in order and that they were putting in what's called a martial law, lockdown rule. so we did not offer that amendment. but if it is an amendment that should have been offered and should be accepted. what this bill really is about is, in my opinion, some sort of a panic attack on the democratic leadership side that they see the election coming up and they need to get more money to their special constituencies. and this is a bill that would do that. so we are going to spend $180 million a day. we are going to be paying taxes on this money for the next 10 years. this $180 million a day is only for six months. it's not going to reduce unemployment rate, which right now is a little under 10%. it's going to be used purely and simply for some of those

states to have more money that might help constituencies, that might help my friends on the majority side of the aisle. as i said earlier, the money that is in the committee that i'm on, jurisdiction, energy and commerce, is really not -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. barton: doesn't have to be spent for medicaid. i would urge a no vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: i'm pleased to yield to the chairman of the health subcommittee of the energy and commerce committee, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for -- mr. pallone: i want to thank my chairman. want to differ strongly with the gentleman from texas as much as i admire him as our ranking member, i would remind the gentleman that this bill is fully paid for by eliminating tax loopholes that send jobs overseas. the fact of the matter is that many states have already budgeted for this money, for this federal dollars and simply don't have their own state

dollars to make up for it if they lose the federal dollars. this traditionally in the past was a bipartisan issue. republicans supported it. i would say that many republican governors, including my own in the state of new jersey, have asked for this money. because they know that if they don't get it they are going to have a huge shortfall in their budget. i don't see this at all as a partisan issue. i don't understand why our ranking member continues to look at it that way. i think it's crucial that congress extend extra help to the states that pay for their citizens who are on medicaid. medicaid rolls have expanded considerably for states because of unemployment. many people have lost their jobs and a lot more people are on medicaid. and states with high unemployment will continue to receive additional percentage points. it simply allows, this legislation allows states to avert medicaid cuts at a time when the economic recession requires a strong safety net. it's also the most efficient way to help states avoid

further layoffs and service cuts that would otherwise slow the economic recovery. it's really bipartisan. many republican governors have asked for it. and this is something that in the past has always been done on a bipartisan basis. i urge support. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. barton: i would like to yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. olson, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas, mr. olson, is recognized for one minute. mr. olson: thank i thank my -- i thank my colleague from texas. madam speaker, the obama stimulus plan was a waste of taxpayer dollars and i'm proud that the elected officials in the texas statehouse had the good sense to keep those funds in reserve. if a member of this body has a problem -- problem with the way the elective representatives of texas choose to use their money, i have some advice for them, go to austin.

madam speaker, the eyes of texas, will be watching as they cast their votes. you are either for texas or against her. or you stand for our state and national constitutions or ignore them. this is the sort of arrogance, pettyness, and political chicanery that the people of america are tired of. i know the texans are. i have great hope that november will bring a much dange of direction in washington. i urge my colleagues to vote no, no, no against this bill. i yield back the balance of my time. . mr. green: i want to share mine, i thank the chairman of the energy and commerce committee for yieldingism support full passage of the

bill. i rise in support of the students and teachers who will benefit from a passage of the education jobs and medicaid assistance act. i ask unanimous consent to place in the record two letters from education groups supporting this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. green: at a time when local and state governments are cutting funding for basic services such as education, public safety and transportation this legislation will bring much-needed assistance, 160,000 educational professionals working now. 14,500 educational jobs in texas alone will be saved. i want to speak to the important provision my texas colleagues on this side of the aisle worked hard to get in the bill. last year, the governor of texas took $3.25 billion in federal stimulation -- stabilization funds specifically designated for educational purposes and used it to build up the state's rainy day fund, which may sound good but there was nothing more than the governor taking

much-needed resources from students and educators of texas in order to make sure the governor of texas does not repeat history and misuse funds, my colleagues and i pushed to have language added to the bill to require the governor provide ashurebes that the funds allocated to texas used to supplement, not supplant, state k will have 12 education funding through the fiscal year 2013. the governor's allies state in recent days it cannot make such assurances because ost unconstitutional. let the record show the governor made the same assurance before including the state's sfablization program application last year this language is supported by texas associated school boards and groups respecting teachers and principals and administrators around the state. i urge my colleagues to vote in

favor of this important legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expire. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. barton: i yield one minute to the member of the committee from the great hoosier state of indiana, mr. buier, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. buyer: i am leaving this body in six months. one side is saying this is about protecting policemen, firefighters, teachers, i'm going home. -- that sounds good. but i'm going home. this is about protecting the conduct of those who didn't do their job and they're frightened now. they don't want to increase taxes, they don't want to cut spending and they don't want to monetize the debt. what do they do? they turn to the federal government and have us monetize the debt, issue bonds, have china do it, so they don't have to make tough judgments. this is the bailout. this is another bailout. folk, we cannot continue to do this.

we talk about what type of nation we want to pass onto our children, let's not do this. i am distressed about it. when we passed the schip as a body and came together, we said we would do so and make eligibility of 133% of poverty. then what happened? a lot of states thought that the good economic times would never end so they mushroomed the eligibility. hi would the gentleman give me an -- would the gentleman give me an additional minute? mr. barton: i yield the gentleman 30 seconds. mr. buyer: two states, new york and new jersey are at 150% of povertism they don't want to make the tough decisions. gets what, not only do state legislatures not want to make tough decisions, this congress doesn't want to make tough decisions. it's why we're fatesing almost a $1.5 trillion annual budget

deficit. america, please, please wake up. and remember in november. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: i'm pleased to yield to the gentlelady from wisconsin, two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. moore: i rise in favor of -- ms. baldwin: i rise in favor of this measure. during this economic crisis, our states have suffered which mean ours citizens have suffered. states that are facing severe budget shortfalls and without federal help will have to take extreme action. who would this hurt? it would hurt our most vulnerable, our children, our elleders, our sick and our frail. people who rely on medicaid benefits would see them

slashed. states would be forced to make cuts where we can least afford it. but not only does medicaid funding protect citizens, it also promotes them. the congressional budget office found that increased medicaid assistance creates jobs and increases demand in the economy. the recovery is under way but it's slow. families in wisconsin and across the nation are struggling to make ends meet and find good jobs. we in the house have time and again passed legislation to try to address this. through additional medicaid funding and dedicated dollars for teachers in our school. finally, today we have the opportunity to send this bill to the president. in wisconsin alone, passing this measure will prevent between 2,000 and 3,000 teachers from being laid off and it will prevent $650 million in medicaid cuts.

i have heard from students, doctors, and state employees who have known for month what is congress was too slow in realizing. these cuts would be catastrophic and we must prevent them. i want to thank chairman waxman for his steadfast commitment to creating jobs and supporting americans -- american families and i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. barton: i yield two minutes to the distinguished republican conference chair from the great state of indiana. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. >> i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pence: the american people are hurting. in the midst of the worst

recession in 25 years. coming home to me esperblesly today more than 1,000 hoosiers are gathered at a job fair in my district, some 65 companies have come together with a few cherished openings. my duty is here but to be honest with you, i'd rather be there, standing with the courageous hoosiers who have come out, put on their sunday best and are reaching for a better future. congress ought to be taking action, but not this. not more of the same. here we go again. another jobs bill, another bailout. washington, d.c. now, after a year and a half of failed economic policies, a stimulus, borrowinging spending, bailout, takeovers, says we need to do another jobs bill, let's do another bailout. $26 billion to states. putting off the hard decisions that states ought to be making and paying for it with more than $9 billion in tax

increases. you know, the american people are fed up with more taxes, more bailouts, more wasteful stimulus, but here we go again. more payouts, more spending, more taxes won't fix it. americans are asking, when will it end? when with will this congress start to come together to make the choices to put our fiscal house in order and to preserve and promote the kind of tax policies that will release the trapped inherent pow over the american economy. it is my hope and prayer for those families gatt nerd muncie at my job fair today that we will not have to wait until after november. but if we do, then we will. and the american people will re-- will remember. november. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized.

mr. waxman: let the american people know that we are trying to help kids get educated and make sure that those who are vulnerable get health care while the republicans are urging that ke wont -- that we continue tax cuts for people making more than $300,000 a year. that, to me is a distortion of priorities. i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from new york, mr. engel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. engel: thank you, madam speaker. i want to take whereupon the chairman left off. this is $26 billion that's paid for. and my republican friends on the other side of the aisle don't want to do that, even though it's paid for, we'll bring back teachers and bring back first responders, instead they want a $700 billion tax break for the rich that's in the paid for. so that doesn't make any sense to me at all. 160,000 education jobs could be lost if we do nothing, including ,000 in my home state

of new york. congress can't sit by biand let these jobs disappear and hurt our children. this assistance is critical to states as they struggle through the recession and this includes a $10 billion education jobs naund will save 140,000 teachers. it's not a payoff to the teachers union. it's a payoff to our children and for the future of this country. this will prevent cuts in education, health care, and social services, madam speaker, we should not play politics with american jobs. i continue to urge support for this bill to ensure that americans are working and our economy is on the road to recovery. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. barton: i yield 30 seconds to the starting third baseman on the congressional republican baseball team, the gentleman from arizona, mr. flake. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. flake: madam speaker, those who advocate for this

legislation are forgetting one very, very important thing. we are broke. with that, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: may i inquire how much time each side has? the speaker pro tempore: both sides have two minutes remaining. mr. waxman: we reserve our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. barton: i yield one minute to the distinguished member of the committee from the great pelican state of louisiana, mr. steve scalise, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. scalise: i want to thank the gentleman from texas for yielding. as american families, as louisiana families are asking where are the jobs? and they're looking to congress for those answers, all that they get from this tone deaf liberal group running congress today is more spending, more taxes, and just continuing with this bailout mentality. americans are saying enough is enough. in fact, if we want to get the economy back on track, what we

need to do is go back to the principles that have proven to work every time to cut businesses, cut taxes for small businesses so the businesses that are creating jobs can do what they need to do. in fact, businesses today are scared to hire anybody because of the policies coming out of washington you cut taxes and cut spending. instead all we see is more spending, more bailouts and more tax increases on the backs of businesses that are going to run more jobs out of this country. it's the wrong answer, we should be here focus option creating jobs, not run manager off. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas. mr. barton: we have one minute left, i'm going to reserve mine, i'm the only other speaker. mr. waxman: same here. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california has the right to close. mr. barton: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. barton: i think it's one

minute. madam speaker, what we have here is a failure to communicate. my friends on the democratic side are talking about things to help the economy, my friends and myself on the republican side are pointing out that this is money we don't have. there's no national emergency. the items that are being funded are items that historically have been funded at the state level work the exception of medicaid which is a state-federal expenditure and in that program, the money doesn't absolutely have to be spent for low income health care assistance. if you look at the way the money is actually allocated, one state, the great state of new york, the empire state, gets over $12.-- gets over 12.5% or 13% of the funds. if you exclude california, new york gets more money than every state west of the mississippi and as has been pointed butt out by mr. buyer of indiana, new york has a medicare re-- medicaid reimbursement rate at

350% of poverty, pushing about $800 for a family of four. this is money we don't have being spent on programs that are not in dire emergency at a time when the unemployment rate is 10%. please vote no on this bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. waxman: this is assistance to the state for medicaid. no state has 300% of poverty for medicaid. that's not the way the state runs it. we're talking about the poorest of the poor. to get med assistance. there may be additional people who can get it for children under the chip program, but not under medicaid. the state can't afford medicaid and we're going to help them by directing federal dollars so that those very poor people can get health care and this assists the state this legislation, in paying for teachers and first responders. what can be more important? it isn't one state versus another, throughout the country

we have to make sure we have an educated population and a chance for health care for those who need it, who cannot afford it. that's why this bill is important, it will also provide jobs, that will otherwise be lost if the states do not receive these funds. put that in the perspective of the republican call for tax cuts to be continued without paying for them for people that make over $300,000 a year. . who key serves our help? let's help the vulnerable of the let's help the next generation. let's provide the funds that are in this legislation for health care, first spoppeders, for teaffers -- for teachers. i urge support for the legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the chair is now prepared to recognize members of the committee on ways and means.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, each for 10 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: i yield myself two minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: the minority comes here and talks about wishing to be back at a jobs fair for those who are unemployed looking for work. having voted against continuing unemployment compensation for those out of work and looking for it. the minority comes here talking about help for small business, having voted against democratic

bills to help small business. on this bill this is not an increase in taxes on job creation. what it is is closing a tax loophole, used by some, to escape taxes and thereby encouraging them to ship jobs overseas. purely and simply. this is the fact. u.s. companies that operate overseas owe taxes when they return that income to the u.s. they get a foreign tax credit for the taxes they pay overseas. what some companies are doing is using those tax credits not against income brought back home but against income obtained elsewhere. this is a tax loophole, purely

and simply. in closing a tax loophole, used by a few, is fair taxation, policy for everybody else. that's what the people of this country demand. close tax loopholes that help shift jobs overseas. we are doing just that in this bill as we have done in several others in the house of representatives. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. camp: last friday we learned the unemployment rate is still at 9.5%. and it would be much higher if the official calculations also looked at the growing number of americans who have become so discouraged they have given up looking for work.

so while congress should be here trying to find ways to get americans back to work, we are here instead to complete action on another extension of stimulus that will also do nothing to reduce the unemployment rate in this country. in fact, this bill and the tax increases in it will hurt job creation. according to the meth tholgi of dr. christina roemer, the president's chief economic advisor, the tax increases in this bill will destroy over 140,000 americans jobs. in an open letter to congress this week, the national association of manufacturers warned, and i quote, imposing $9.6 billion in tax increases on these companies will jeopardize the job of american manufacturing employees and stifle our fragile economy, end quote. similarly, the u.s. chamber of commerce warned they would impose draconian tax increases on american wordwide -- worldwide companies that would hinder job creation, decrease the competitiveness of american

businesses, and deter economic growth. these tax increases are a mistake and as i noted during debate two weeks ago, most of these have never been the subject of any committee hearing or markup. it's impossible -- it is possible that upon review some of these provisions might make sense if packaged with other changes to address the facts that our corporate tax rate is soon-to-be the highest among all industrialized nations. our international tax system is deeply flawed and our tax code is increasingly putting our companies and their employees at a tremendous competitive disadvantage. but we never got the opportunity to hear from the american employers or to offer any amendments. it's truly a disappointing breakdown of the committee system which is supposed to ensure that policies are vetted and reviewed before passage. i also want to mention the phantom tax increases that aren't in this bill but will soon see. the speaker has already

indicated she opposes two of the spending offsets included in this bill, one relates to food stamps, the other is a cut in funding for renewable energy spending programs. together those items total $13.4 billion, more than half the total offsets in the bill. next month when the house considers some other legislation, don't be surprised to see another $13 billion in higher taxes to prevent those spending cuts. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to the very distinguished gentleman from texas, who has been a champion on the issue of tax loopholes, mr. doggett, a member of the ways and means committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. doggett: today we close international tax loopholes and open more educational opportunity. last year in texas governor perry and his cohorts

misdirected $3.2 billion in federal aid to education simply to replace state education commitments leaving our schools not one dime better off than if we never offered them that federal aid to education in the first place. given this very unfortunate history for our school children, and the many unique educational challenges that texas faces, we have good reason to include in this legislation texas specific safeguards to prevent more such shen nanny begans. with a formula that ensures that this year federal education aid will get directly to our local schools. our approach enjoys the support of school trustees, of superintendents, of principles, of teachers. we have been listening across texas to our parents at this time of excitement as so many young people are going back to school, some for the first

time, and we are offering those families and those local schools the important support they need for local education. paying for every dime of it. and we are supporting those local education decisions by local school trustees to achieve quality education free of interference from the state. we are demanding accountability from the state of texas. for some reason accountability seems like a good concept for everyone except some republican leaders and some international corporate tax avoiders. i want to be sure that there's a level playing field for taxpayers so that the small business down the street that could face a property tax increase if we don't have adequate support for education, that that business isn't -- doesn't continue to have to pay a much higher rate than some international corporate tax group that has all the fancy

c.p.a.'s to avoid paying its fair share. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i yield one minute to the distinguished member from tennessee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. mrs. blackburn: thank you, madam speaker. i think it is important for us to realize what is happening here today. i do oppose the legislation that the majority is bringing forward today. today we are being asked to raise taxes for 10 years in order to pay for medicaid for six months. now, think about that. only here in washington would an action like that seem to make sense or even be thought to be sustainable. 10 years to pay for six months. now, this is why the people across this nation oppose this type action. and i think if my friends were home listening instead of here in d.c. spending some more, that what they would hear from people is they are sick and tired, they have really gotten

their fill of continuing to tax, continuing to spend, robbing peter to pay paul, and going through this process of kicking the can down the road but not addressing the problem. the spending is out of control. the american people are overtaxed, this government is overspent and it is time that we demand accountability. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: it's now my true pleasure to yield one minute to our very distinguished majority leader, the colleague from the great state of maryland. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized. mr. hoyer: i thank my friend for yielding. the hour is late. members have come back, properly so, to address an issue that we addressed months ago. the senate sent it to us. and we were gone. we thought it our responsibility to ask members

to come back because if we hadn't come back, if we didn't pass this bill, what would happen? 160,000 teachers would be at risk of being laid off and probably would be laid off. what would that mean? it would mean larger class sizes for teachers to deal with. children not receiving the kind of education that they need. they need to be competitive in the global marketplace. what might have also happened? some 160,000 police and fire personnel, emergency response teams may have had to be laid off. that's why we came back. that's why we believe this is so important. and how have we paid for this? because we do not add a nickel to the national debt, notwithstanding the previous speaker. we paid for this because we believe if we are going to invest in our future, we also are going to pay for it. not ask our grandchildren to pay for it. now that's a concept that was

jettisoned under republican leadership but we re-established it. so we pay for this. one of the ways we pay for it is to ask people, look, if you are going to send jobs overseas, we are not going to give you a tax break. i know there's some apparently not for that and they are going to vote against this bill. my view is what we are doing is making sure that our children have the proper education that they need. making sure that our communities are safe and, yes, making sure that we try to keep every job in america so that we can continue to make things in america so people can make it in america. that's what this bill is all about. the hour's late. i think everyone knows the issue. and i ask my colleagues vote for this critical piece of legislation. keep our teachers, our police, our fire personnel on the job.

that's why the senate passed this bill with over 60% majority in a bipartisan vote. let's follow suit. pass this bill. make america better. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: at this time i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman from florida. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida is recognized for two minutes. ms. brown-waite: i thank the gentleman. madam speaker, congress adjourned without doing anything useful over the last year and a half to get this economy turned around. america knows it. sadly this bill isn't going to change that fact. my colleagues know that they bankrupted the states with obamacare and they know full well this won't be the last time the federal government borrows money to bail out the states. as for the education jobs

funding, the money provided in the stimulus, the $54 billion, provided in the stimulus was supposed to do the trick, but like the stimulus as a whole, it just didn't work, did it? this $10 billion is a transparent handout to the teacher's union who, not only tip to insist on greater pay, but actually got their democrat buddies to put it in the bill. if states take the money, their hands are actually tied on making a tough budget decision choices. including pay. as a result, the states will be back here again and very soon asking for more federal bailouts. which the current majority will probably be very happy to give to them. . my democrat colleagues are incredibly generous when it comes to spending ofrpblt p.m.

that's other people's money. the problem is, the other people, the taxpayers in our country, already owe $130,000 apiece in federal debt. that's why the american people are fed up. finally, any claim that the bill is paid for, and i'm putting that in quote, paid for is utterly nonsense. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle know that. this bill before us represents another $14 billion in sham accounting gimmicks that the majority cannot resist using. never mind that you used the money that tax revenues several times to pay for three different spending bills. we all know that the $14 billion in food stamp cuts will never actually -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. brown-waite: i thank the gentleman from michigan. we all know the $14 billion in food stamp cuts will never actually really take place so it is a sham, can't it, folks?

just like the doc fix and everything else you kick the can down the road far enough so far, in fact that it won't have to be counted in today's budget. the bailouts must end. the borrowing must end. the gimmicks must end. and if we are ever again to have a competitive country, the relentless tax increases on job creators also must end. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to the gentlelady from ohio, ms. kilroy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. ms. kilroy: thank you. across america, summer is coming to an end and -- and parents are thinking about their children's return to the school. they have hopes and dreams for their children's future and

they want them to succeed in school, to be able to go to college and get a good job in a competitive global economy and they know they need a dedicated teach for the that classroom guiding their children's learning. but school boards across the country have been making cuts and laying off teachers. schools in ohio have been facing cuts. schools have seen their revenue decline. schools also rely in state assistance --' rely on steat assistance and ohio, like many states, has budget problems. in ohio that means 5,500 teachers. it will provide the necessary funding for medicaid assistance as well, responding to urgent requests from republican and democratic governors. in order to pay for this bill, we are closing tax loophole that was been abused that have sent jobs overseas. not only will it help pay to

keep teachers in the looseroom, wit ill end a job drain and help us keep jobs in america. why are my colleagues so opposed? they don't seem to understand that investing in our nation's future means investing in our nation's schools. they call it children's special interest. children don't have special lobbyists like wall street does they need us to stand up for them. but those who have been enjoying tax loopholes are special interests with those lobbyists. perhaps opponents of this bill are listening to them. that's the wrong way to go. that's the way of the past. it's time to end business as usual and politics as usual and stand up for america's workers and stand up for america to keep jobs here and it's time to stand for america's children and america's teachers and america's schools. it's time to keep our communities safe and keep firefighters and police i -- i

thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman mr. camp is recognized. mr. camp: i'm prepeered to reserve or prepared to close if the gentleman has no further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has the right to close. mr. levin: if the gentleman is inquiring whether we have one more speaker other othan to close, the answer is no. mr. camp, why don't you close and then our speaker will close. mr. camp: thank you. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. camp: i have before my letters from the chamber of commerce, the business round table as well as pace, promote america's competitive edge, and the u.s. chamber of commerce is the world's largest business federation, representing more than three million business organizations of every size. they strongly support the

legislation because it would place draconian tax increases on the companies and deter economic growth in the jobs that come from that. likewise, the national association of manufacturers, the nation's largest industrial trade association, representing small and large manufacturers in every industrial sector in all 50 state they also oppose this legislation. they represent 22 million workers in the united states, more than 19% of the private sector work force. and 50% of -- and 53% of all manufacturing employees are employed by companies that have operations overseas and they oppose the tax increases because it will jeopardize the jobs of american manufacturing employees and stifle this very fragile economy. likewise the business round table, which again is an association that represents more than 12 million employees, has also sent a letter opposing

this legislation because they say that this legislation will again only make matters worse, make it more difficult for u.s. companies to compete in the world economy and then actually puts u.s. jobs at stake because of that. and again, pace, which represents more than 63 million american jobs that depend on the competitiveness of american employers worldwide says that at a time when other countries are taking steps to attract business, this legislation actually does -- sends the exact opposite message, discourages investment in the u.s. and job creation here in the u.s. i ask unanimous consent to submit these letters for the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. camp: i thank it's unfortunate that again here on the floor i'm having to submit these letters here when actually the appropriate place would be in the committee on ways and means. but unfortunately, the committee on ways and means has never had a hearing on these

provisions. never had a markup on this legislation. we've nod hat a process that's been open to employers to come forward before the committee and be heard on the record so that we might be able to adjust this or put this in context. as i said we need broad based international tax reform in the u.s. this piecemeal approach couldn't -- count work, hurt ours competitiveness and again, i think if we had a system where there was a committee hearing or mark yum, on review you might improve on this or find a way to address the serious issue that pretty soon our corporate tax rate will be the highest amon -- among all the industrialized nations and we could put on the record the deep flaws now international tax systems and the flaw nours tax coat. instead what we're doing today is rushing to the floor again without transparency, without hearings, certainly no opportunity for american employers to come forward and

be heard on this issue. we're putting them at a tremendous competitive disadvantage at a time when they need to be competing around the world for jobs. i urge opposition to this legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield the balance of the time to our distinguished speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is rni the speaker: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding and i thank the distinguished chairman of the ways and means committee for bringing this important legislation to the floor, working closely with the chair of the appropriations committee. this must be about the third time, mr. chairman, that we have brought this to the floor, the provision that repeals that provision of the law which rewards businesses for sending jobs overseas. this is not a new subject to the congress. it is not a new subject to the

floor. thanks to your leadership. today, mr. speaker -- madam speaker, we have an opportunity to create jobs. the press of a button, each of us will play a role in creating over 300,000 jobs. saving over 300,000 jobs across the country. they're jobs, these people are consumers, it's important to our economy that they are employed. it goes well beyond that, to jobs for teachers, the education of our children, it's about the innovation of our nation, it's bigger than just a job. it's about the future. these are jobs that firefighters and police officers, about the safe i have to our neighborhoods and our communities. where our children can thrive. it's about nurses and health care providers to keep our country strong in terms of the health and well being of the

american people. it's about the stability of state budgets. economists have told us that if this legislation were not passed and these jobs are not saved and the budgets of the states were not stabilized, we would go into another deep recession like the one we inherited from the previous administration and it would be a much longer path out of that recession. so i thank the distinguished chairman for bringing us to the floor with this legislation. i thank the members on both sides of the aisle for respond so quickly to the call to return to washington to save and create jobs for the american people. this is part -- this pay-for in this legislation which repeals the opportunity for businesses to get a tax break for sending jobs overseas is part of our make it in america agenda.

make it in america means manufacture it in america, it also enables people to make it in america. this is about innovation. innovation that's created here with our creativity and the benefit of our education system and our entrepreneurial spirit and the rest and then it says, when we have the idea and we create the innovation, that we create the jobs here to produce it to manufacture it and not to up-- to scale up overseas. invent here create the jobs overseas -- no. invent here, manufacture here, and market to the world. this is really important legislation also because of the way it is paid for. while i don't support all the provisions, i'm not happy about the taking money from our energy sector or from food stamps, but i hope we can, mr.

chairman, make that up in another way, i am very pleased about the funds that are obtained by repealing the provision to send jobs offshore. this legislation is fiscally responsible and fully paid for. it is -- it invests in america's communities, again by closing that tax loophole that allows corporations to ship jobs overseas. have i said that enough times? those who claim that the legislation will add to the deficit are simply wrong. in fact, according to the nonpartisan congressional budget office this bill reduces the deficit by $1.4 billion. madam speaker, it's about time that we got this bill passed. we first passed it in the house last year, the end of last year. we passed it again, some features of it, in the spring, finally, the senate acted last week.

finally, they were able to get enough votes to pass it with a supermajority in the senate. the minute we anticipated that that would happen, the word went out that we called to the house to come back to washington so that not another day would go by without our, again, pressing that button for over 300,000 jobs. my grandchildren, ones who are in public school, went back to school yesterday. so this is -- it's about time, again, that we -- children in other parts of the country may be preparing to go back to school in another week or so, or the beginning of september. they cannot afford to wait for us to put teachers back into the classroom. that's why it was urgent that we act. communities struggling to keep police and firemen on the beat and firefighters on the job

that were on the brink of layoffs, this is good news for them. and tens of thousands of americans will not be joining the ranks of the unemployed. so i thank the gentleman for -- again for his leadership, for making this part of what we have been doing for a matter of months, so we were ready, we were ready when the senate acted so that we an educate our children, innovate for our country prork tect our neighborhoods and our homes, as well as keep the american people healthy in a fiscally sound way. again, we are doing so in a way that helps people make it in america, and for that, i am grateful to the chairman and to my -- to the distinguished democratic leader, mr. hoyer, who coined the phrase, but for all of our members who work sod hard to make america -- to have

america continue to be the shining star, the lead competitor, the innovator, number one, president kennedy when he launched a campaign to send a man to the moon and back safely, many, many decades ago, he said he would do so within 10 years and he did. but when he did it he said if we are to honor the vows of our founders, we must be first and therefore we intend to be first. this legislation is yet another piece of legislation that enables america to be first. thank you, mr. chairman, for allowing that privilege and to mr. obey as well. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 1606, the previous question is ordered. the question is on the motion by the gentleman from

wisconsin, mr. obey. all those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. mr. levin: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman asks for the yeas and nays. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 247 -- the speaker: on this vote the yeas are 247, the nays are 161. the motion is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from wisconsin rise? mr. obey: i ask unanimous consent all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 1586 and the motion to concur. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. lungren of california for today, mr. gingrey of georgia for today and mr. young of florida for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the personal requests are approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. hastings: madam speaker, pursuant to section 2-b of house

concurrent resolution 308, 111th congress, i move that the house do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. accordingly, pursuant to house concurrent resolution 308, 111th congress, the house stands adjourned until 2:00 p.m. on tuesday, september 14, 2

the gentleman from new york.

mr. rangel: i rise to the floor because the newspapers and the media have indicated that there is a concern about some of the members in this house that are re-- i retire or remove myself from this body and i've always tried to play by the rules and i cannot think of anybody that has encouraged me to speak here . and i want to thank all of you who are concerned about me for saying that, you know, a guy's a fool to represent himself as some of the people have said. but i have been losing a lot of sleep over these allegations and my family and community. some of these rules that they have is that i'm restricted by confidentiality, but for years i have been saying no comment, no comment, no comment to a lot

of serious allegations because i could not comment and i would refer them to the ethics committee. and when the ethics committee finally brought out their statement of alleged violations, it was a long list of things, and somehow the chairman of the subcommittee of investigation indicated that i had received a lot of offers to settle this thing so that it would not cause embarrassment to my democratic friends. and that i'd been offered a reprimand. and a lot of people kind of felt that sounded like a wonderful opportunity to remove this so that i could leave the congress with some degree of

dignity. why, even some people said that the president had suggested that his life might be made easier if there was no charlie rangel, so-called, scandal. but i interpreted it another way. i think when the president said that he wanted me to end my career in dignity, he didn't put a time limit on it, and i would think that his concern would be that if any member of the house of representatives has been accused of serious crimes or allegations that somehow within the process, even though -- there has to be some process in which the member has an opportunity to tell his constituents, his family and his friends what he didn't believe. so when the chairman of the investigating committee said i have been offered a settlement

reminded me of something that i will devote my retiring years the science and education, which is the major thrust of my attempt here, is that those of you that come anywhere near criminal court, we have a terrible thing that happens throughout these united states and that is that someone gets arrested for a very serious crime and they get their lawyer and the lawyer explains that i think it's better that you plead guilty to a lesser crime. he says, well, i'm not only not guilty but i don't even know what's involved here. they said, listen, we're not suggesting if you plea guilty if you're innocent, but i think you ought to know this judge if you're found guilty is going to send you away for 20 years. on the other hand you have no offenses, you're a first offender, and if you could just forget about this thing and

explain later what happens. so he continues to tell the -- his lawyer that, hey, i'm willing to admit what i've done wrong and i've done some things wrong but i shouldn't have to -- anyway, he says, listen, we would never tell you to quit or resign. we are telling you that it would be easier for us that this is not an issue. but knowing the president, as i do, i think he believes dignity means that everybody is entitled to be judged for allegations against them. we come back to this house because the speaker has called us here in order to make certain that we provide resources for governors and mayors to maintain our teachers and our firefighters, and rangel's not on the schedule for anything which is ok because i know that the members of the committee, they work hard, it's a selfless job. god knows i wouldn't take it. i respect the time that they

placed on this. and it's been almost two years, but i have a primary that takes place a couple days before they even thought about meeting. and then i found out from my lawyer that even when they meet on the 13th of september there is no trial date then. and so i don't want to embarrass anybody. as a matter of fact, those people that believe that their election is going to be dependent on me resigning, i like to encourage them to believe i think republicans have given you enough reason to get re-elected and they continue to do something. but quite frankly, i think -- a lot of people don't know but when the -- well, i don't want to be critical of the ethics committee because my lawyer said you can't make them -- you can't get annoyed with them

because there still may be room for a settlement. and i thought about it. and, well, when i found out that one of the republicans that will be sitting on what they call the adjudication committee had made remarks condemning me for my contributions to the city college that it was a rangel thing, an ego thing, and a corrupt thing, and he was going to judge me, i asked my lawyer. i said, how can they do that? he said, well, the ethics committee can do whatever they want. i said, well, do me a favor. i've paid close to $2 million. i continue to owe you money. and you're telling me that you have no idea when there's going to be a hearing. and every time i talk with you, i said, do me a favor on

friday, let's see what happens today in terms of reaching out to settle this thing because i can't afford to be represented by counsel. each and every day the expenses build up, and i think that i have an obligation to younger members of congress to be able to tell them, if you couldn't raise the $2 million, you're out of business no matter what the allegations are. because no one's going to read the defense. and, of course, just the allegations by themselves with -- by themselves would be out of business. i am here because i could afford lawyers for close to two years, but everyone would know that there comes a limit. so i told them, just put everything on hold. see what happens when we meet

here. and guess what? nothing happened. there's no agenda. so what they're saying is that, while the ethics committee will be leaving to -- for members to be able to work in their districts and to get re-elected and i'm having a primary that i have to wait until after my primary to find out when the ethics committee intends to have a hearing. and then that hearing comes just before, maybe, the general election. there must be something wrong with the rules because people would advise me that i could only hurt myself by coming before this committee. nobody has tried to protect the integrity of the congress with two years -- almost two years of investigation to say the mistakes that rangel has made

should be public and should have been public earlier than now. and i couldn't say anything because i didn't want to offend and don't want to offend the ethics committee, but the ethics committee won't even tell me when i'm going to have a hearing. and, hey, people concerned about me, i'm 80 years old, i don't want to die before the hearing. and i think my electorate are entitled to finding out who their congressman for 40 years is. who am i? am i corrupt? what did they offer me? and i want to be a role model for new members and tell them the mistakes i made so they don't make. and so there are a list of foundations that specialize in providing funds for education. so i'm convinced that the president wants some dignity in knowing that not only my -- am i one of his strongest supporters, but i know that you know that unless we able to

provide education for every child that's there, almost by any means possible, that our nation's national security is being threatened by foreigners. that our ability to be ahead of the curve in terms of trade, and nobody is more supportive of the president in trade, clear up some of the things in the korean bill so you don't hurt us, clean up a little corruption and violence in colombia and move on with the thing. so the whole idea is really me trying to have some dignity in making certain that america is stronger. now, the thing is that in the haste of sending out hundreds of letters, never asking for a penny but still suggesting we should meet with these people because i knew that i would hope that they would convince them to provide money. now, a lot of people have done that. doesn't mean it's right. but the rules have changed. and so there has to be a

penalty for grabbing the wrong stationary and not really doing the right thing. but it's not corrupt. it may be stupid or neglect but -- neglect but it's not corrupt. -- neglijent but it's not corrupt. the benefit is that you have a legacy with your name up there. well, we should go to my website to take a look at my answers. this is a broken down building that you have to run away from if someone's going to put your name on it. but it's still there. then they say that i would receive a luxurious offer. the sworn testimony was. they never told me. who in the heck needs an office with 40 years of service in the congress in a broken down building? and then they said, hey, we just put it in there so we

encourage people to put it in there. they said the name. they thought was not a benefit to me, but a benefit in order for them to get money. so i can't imagine why in the cause of all of these things that government personnel didn't buy stamps -- well, if you think of them as official and you're wrong, then i violated the benefits. then at the end of the day the inferences are very serious and mistakes can be made and they shouldn't have -- these things shouldn't have happened. but i can't walk away and have you guys doing your campaign because i'm annoyed and the action is out there calling me corrupt and no one is coming forward saying rangel is not corrupt, rangel didn't make a nickel. no witness ever said there was preferential treatment given. and one guy that had an issue before the senate, staff, republicans, everybody said it never came before the house but

they keep putting it down there. and guess what? it was the district attorney of new york for over 40 years that suggested that i meet with him because he was in the education fill an tropic business in addition to having business in the senate which republicans and democrats say never came to the ways and means committee. and staff certainly can prove it. i don't know how far they'd go in making a mistake, but you have to be very careful members making certain when they change the rules that you know what happens. and i'm prepared to say, i'm sorry for any embarrassment that has caused. another issue has to do with having an office, a congressional office in the building that i live in. . people say that's taking advantage, rent control,

stabilized apartment. nobody has said that the ethics committee never found for stabilized apartment. no one said i broke any laws. no one said that the apartment that they considered two had always been considered one at the least. no one said that 10 years ago there was an apartment, one bedroom apartment that i got from my family, political friends, i no longer have. but the concern was how do you explain the congressional office? let's read the lapped lord's testimony. he said he was 20% vacant. that he needed money. that he knew that the checks were paid by the congressional committee. that the mail came in rangel for congress. and that the lawyers have told him and the officials of the city and state of new york that

there was no violation of any law or rules. and what was the benefit? the benefit was that your colleague and friend was not sensitive to the fact that there was appearance as though i was being treated differently than anyone else. but the landlord said he didn't treat me any differently. no one said that they did treat me differently. but i have to admit that i >> congressman charles rangel on the house floor now. live now to house speaker nancy pelosi and other house democrats on a bill they just passed for a state aid medicaid program and money for education jobs. >> no, i was looking for mr. levin. good afternoon.

this is really a very happy afternoon for us because the house just passed legislation that has a direct relationship to the strength of our communities, the education of our children, the safety of our neighborhoods, the stability of the economy of our states and really points directly to our prospects for the future. we voted to keep over 300,000 teachers, police officers, firefighters and private sector workers on the job. members of congress rushed here today as soon as we heard that there was a prospect that the senate might pass this legislation last week. word went out. members were here in full force to press a button in support of those hundreds of thousands of jobs. [applause]

oh, there you are, mr. chairman. we're pleased that the senate finally took the action that they did. this legislation was necessary not just from a legislative standpoint but because we heard from americans like those who join us here today. kathy johnson, a school board member from columbus, ohio, who knows the impact this investment will have on the education of the next generation of teachers. laura welsh from purse envoy -- from purse envoy, new jersey. she worked on behalf of the children of the education of our children for 24 years and understands the heartbreaking impact this economy has had on teachers and opportunities. stella edwards. stella, raise your hand, so everyone can see you. president of the chesterfield virginia county council of p.t.a. and a powerful voice on keeping america's teachers in their classrooms. i know there are many p.t.a.

families here. if you can all raise so we can acknowledge the presence of some of our p.t.a. families today. ok. some in the audience. officer dave stokes of the annapolis police department who understands what this investment will mean to the safety of our communities. and we are joined here today by children, our nation's future leaders, and our innovators and most eloquent example of what we need to -- president kennedy called them our greatest resource and our best hope for the future. i'd like to thank all of the advocates for children and their families who are here today. why don't you give yourselves a nice round of applause? [applause] today, again, we will create over 300,000 jobs or save them, not just any job, but jobs that are the most significant in our

country. a sense of community that our teachers, our police and firefighters, our health care workers bring, and we will do it in a fiscally responsible way by closing costly tax loopholes that allow corporations to ship american jobs overseas. this is part of what our distinguished majority leader, mr. hoyer, called our make it in america agenda. make it, manufacture it in america and make it so people can make it on their own in america. and we believe that repealing that provision that enables businesses to ship jobs overseas is a very important step in that direction. [applause] i acknowledge mr. hoyer, our distinguished majority leader, the two chairmen who brought the bill to the floor today, lead off chairman david obey, the chairman of the appropriations committee. thank you, mr. obey. then, the bill was passed on to

the ways and means committee chairman, chairman levin, who has brought this tax provision to the bill on a number of occasions, as mr. obey brought the education and first responders piece a number of times as well. and we're here joined by our chair of our policy committee but also the chair of the education and work force committee, who's been a fighter for keeping these teachers on the jobs, chairman george miller. he is joined -- before you applaud for him, i want to acknowledge the chairman of the subcommittee on elementary, secondary and -- early childhood education, elementary and secondary education, chairman dale kildee of michigan. [applause] now, i'm pleased to introduce kathy johnson, who will tell us what this legislation means to her school district in ohio.

kathy. >> thank you good afternoon. i am kathy johnson, a school board member from the southwestern city school district in ohio which educates nearly 21,000 students and is the sixth largest district in the state. in spite of a governor who champions education and a state legislature that work with him to pass a comprehensive education reform law called the education opportunity act, the economy has forced school districts, including mine, to make budget cuts. in my case that includes two school closures in the last school year and teacher and staff reductions for the current fiscal year. however, the house's passage of the education jobs fund today will enable school districts like southwestern city schools to maintain key services that help advance student achievement. for example, my district can

benefit as we look to hire teachers and school personnel to implement intervention programs and students who need added support to ensure they will get the help they need to allow them to be successful. the education jobs fund will help my district maintain the continuity for core instruction that is needed with appropriate class sizes and an enriched click curriculum for services for reading, math and the language arts. other districts are finalizing budgets this month so assurances knowing that funding will be available soon at the beginning of the school year to help mitigate layoffs and also reinstate teachers and staff in some communities is of significant importance. totals for students will not be lost. this legislation will also help a number of school districts avoid or reduce the cost of borrowing funds in order to sustain programs and faculty. so on behalf of the

southwestern city school district, the ohio school board association and the national school board association, i convey our sincere appreciation to speaker pelosi, the members of the house of representatives, and the united states senate for your action to help save thousands of jobs for teachers and staff throughout the country. the education jobs fund represents strong support for our students and our schools as a vital investment in the economic recovery and american competitiveness. thank you very much. and i would now -- [applause] i would now like to turn it over to lois welsh from new jersey. >> good afternoon, everyone. i am a school teacher in new jersey.

i teach at the high school. and my focus is special education and the english language. thank you, to speaker pelosi, and all members of the house, who took a stand for students and education. for 20 years i worked in the public school as a secretary in new jersey and loved my job throughout that time. however, a number of years ago i made the decision to return to school and get an experience and education i needed to serve the students of my community in a new capacity. after several years of attending school at night, working full time and raising three children, i fulfilled my dream of becoming a high school teacher of special education students and proudly accepted a position at the high school. sadly, only after two years of teaching in school, along with i, myself, along with 86 other

teachers in the district, were given pink slips of not to return in september. when teachers are laid off, the class sizes grow, students get no one-on-one attention, schools go without librarians and school nurses, important programs are cut, school days and weeks are shortened. today, i am the only one of eight teachers in our district who received a pink slip in june that is recalled for september. none of my colleagues in the high school have been so fortunate. for more than 75 of my colleagues, their future is in limbo, and it's not just about them. that is, 75 fewer teachers will be available in the classroom

when school reopens in september. that 75 fewer teachers giving our kids the fundamental skills they need to complete and succeed in the global community. i am here today to speak for them and the children that we love to teach. the money approved by the house today will allow our district to rehire and bring more of our colleagues back into the classroom where they actually belong. i am thankful to our representatives for passing this bill. which is not -- which is a shot in the arm for public education across the country. thank you for putting our children first. [applause] i would like to now turn it over to stella edwards from

chesterfield, virginia. [applause] >> thank you for allowing me to join you today. hello. my name is stella edwards. i'm the president of the chesterfield county council of p.t.a.'s where i work with nearly 40,000 members and provide training on family engagement in education and advocate for our local school divisions on education reform to ensure academic success. i have served the virginia p.t.a. for over 17 years, and i'm also a proud member of the national p.t.a. the largest volunteer child advocacy organization in this nation. the national p.t.a. was created to meet a profound challenge to better the lives of children. and today p.t.a. continues to flourish because we have never lost sight of our goals, to change the lives of children across this great nation to be a better place for them to

live. my role in p.t.a. is informed by the many hats i wear from day-to-day as a mother, a wife, a substitute teacher, a community organizer and former united states army officer. each of these pages in my own personal history has led me to give a great understanding, a better understanding, rather, to the unique and critical role that parents and teachers working together can have on the lives of our children. and that's why i'm here today. last week the senate passed the comprehensive jobs package that includes $10 billion in funding to prevent the layoffs of approximately 140,000 teachers. today, i'm proud to stand along with speaker pelosi and others that were vital in this effort in order to get passage in the house of representatives. i commend the members of the house for coming back into session to pass this education funding package and finish

their unfinished business. the business of children's education. our children, my children, your child and your neighbor's child. and what does this all mean? over the last two years chesterfield county public school division has laid off approximately 500 teachers and classroom support personnel. this law brings -- being signed today, means that they and thousands of other teachers around this country will be able to step out of the those unemployment lines and back into the classroom where they belong. we see that the national p.t.a. has for a long, long time said that families and teachers and school districts and communities also have a shared responsibility to work together to close the achievement gap that affects so many of our communities. it's simple really, children

benefit for having engaged families in their lives. in fact, we now know that involvement is one of the strongest predicters of children's school success and that families play a vital role in a child's cognitive, their social and their emotional development. this is from birth to adolescence and teachers, the very same teachers whose jobs need to be saved know and understand and continue to emphasize the importance of family engagement in education. i want to thank congress for protecting these teachers, for protecting the jobs and protecting our children from overcrowded classrooms which we all know will negatively affect their learning. i want to thank you again for having me at this time. thank you. >> in her remarks, stella asked the question, what does this all mean? what this all means, as she

described, is that this is good news for children. when people ask me what are the three most important issues facing the congress, i always say the same thing, our children, our children, our children. many of the leaders that you see here have been champions for our children. their health, and that is affected by the health care workers who we put back to work, their education, we've heard our distinguished speakers, kathy johnson, mark welsh and stella edwards speak about what this will do for our children's education, safe and clean neighborhoods in which they can thrive. i'm so pleased that we have officer stokes here representing the first responders to people who keep our neighborhoods safe and have us have an intact sense of community. so, our health, our education, the safety and security of their homes and their neighborhoods and the economic

security of their families. and by the offset that is in this bill, to repeal a provision in the law that enables businesses to send -- give the tax break to businesses to send jobs overseas, we repeal that and we say, we want to, as steny says, make it america and we want to manufacture it in america, let's bring those jobs home. while that speaks to the economic security of our children. i want to commend senator -- leader reid and members of the senate for the action that they took. i'm so proud of what the house of representatives has done today and i'm very honored now to sign this important legislation so relevant to the lives of america's families, so important to our sense of community. i just want the children to know, after i sign the bill, our distinguished clerk of the house will make sure that the signatures are in order and the house and the senate and then

she will personally deliver it to the president of the united states for his signature which i believe will be later this afternoon. so, before you all probably get home this evening, this will be the law of the land. it calls for celebration. this is how it is. this is the bill. this is the bill. this is the bill that goes on and on. it's written on special parchment paper and then i'll sign the bill here. i have to use all these pens. then we'll send it over to the

president and he will sign the bill. not yet. i have to use these pence on the first part here -- pens on the first part here. just as on inauguration day, the president uses pennsylvania avenue to be inaugurated. today we will send this bill up pennsylvania avenue back to the whowls. for the signature of president barack obama. [applause]

>> speaker pelosi. >> i just want to say something about the president. because education has been such a key issue for the president that i want to thank him for his extraordinary leadership in making this vote possible as well. his vision, his leadership and now today with his signature. thank you all. >> thank you, folks. thank you.

>> thank you. >> did i give you one? >> thank you. >> thank you all very much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> now republicans on the

legislation. they spoke with reporters before debate on the bill. this is about 15 minutes. >> good morning. good morning. >> welcome back to washington. the house republicans just completed a meeting of the house republican conference and we are prepared to go to the floor on behalf of the american people. and house republicans will vigorously oppose this latest installment of the failed democratic policies of stimulus, bailouts and higher taxes as a means of economic

growth. on a personal level i must tell you that i'm deeply conflicted today. i know my duties are here in washington and it's a privilege to discharge them. but today, as we speak, hundreds of my constituents who are struggling in this economy are gathered at the sixth congressional district job fair. we have 65 employers at the university campus. people are there looking for opportunities and it grives -- grieves my heart that i have to be here on the floor of the congress when i could be there encouraging hoosier families that are out of work and struggling. the truth is, if i was walking in those hallways, i expect i'd hear what i hear back home all the time and that is, washington, d.c., just doesn't get it. the american people know we can't borrow and spend and bail our way or tax our way back to a growing economy. the people i serve in eastern

indiana saw 12% unemployment in muncie a year ago. it's 1% today. struggling under the weight of these failed policies and they long for leadership in washington, d.c., that will do something different. house republicans are determined to continue to oppose efforts to pass a national energy tax or do the largest tax increase in history to take effect in january. house republicans are determined to fight for fiscal discipline in washington, d.c., and progrowth policies to put those indiana families back to work. >> in eastern washington, small businesses keep asking me, is anyone in d.c. listening? does anyone get it? and they're angry and frustrated with the fact that they continue to see washington wasting money and the continued bailouts. what are we doing back here today? we're continuing the bailouts. the leadership in congress seems to forget that we have a $13 trillion federal debt, but

american families don't forget that. and they know that in their own households, in their own businesses they've had to tight their belts, they've had to cut spending, they've had to make difficult decisions and they expect us to do likewise, rather than just continuing to add to the debt for our good morning. today is really the majority's priorities in governing this country. you got to ask, why are we being brought back for this so-called emergency session? are we being brought back to cut taxes and ensure that those tax hikes don't go into effect? no. are we being brought back to ensure that we don't increase the federal deficit by jacking up spending? no. are we being brought back to maybe look at the success and the mission being executed in afghanistan and iraq? no. we're being brought back to essentially vote on the extension of the stimulus bill

which has been an utter failure even by the administration's own standards. so, for the american people looking today as to what is going on in washington, i think this is clear evidence of the fact there is a huge divide in terms of the vision that belongs to each party. >> you know, the american people are speaking out in record numbers. last week i had the opportunity to be in the district, to talk with my constituents and to listen to them. what they repeatedly say is, the bailouts have to stop. no more bailouts. they want to make certain that congress is listening and that congress is taking action. they know what is required for jobs growth to take place. and they know that what they're seeing come from washington is the exact opposite. they do not want to see more government control, more

government interference, higher taxes. they want the federal government spending to stop and they want the jobs growth to take place. >> we've already heard about this fiscal irresponsible bailout with another job-killing tax increase. reportedly it's to help teachers. but less than two years ago, democrats put $100 billion into education to help teachers. that didn't create new permanent jobs. and this additional $10 billion won't do it either. it will make the teacher's unions happy but it won't make teaching in schools better. this does nothing to fix the stopping policies which is last hired, first fired, much supported by the teacher's union. we ought to be improving education, not just dumping more money into that that we don't have. -- into it that we don't have. >> i'll remind all of that you this year the federal

government's going to borrow 43 cents for every $1 the federal government spends. think about that. almost half of the money that's going to be spent this year has to be borrowed from our kids and our grandkids. and what are they going to do? they're going to make it worse. this bailout to the teacher's unions is some of the most irresponsible policy that i've seen. the american people are screaming at the top of their lung, stop, and washington continues to spend, spend, spend. well, listen, i've been around my district and i can tell you what, i've been around a few other districts. the american people know that it's time for the spenders to go and to have real fiscal responsibility here in washington, d.c. >> questions. >> i was wondering if the republicans are offering any kind of help to the state? is it just that they cut their

budgets? would you support new revenues? >> we are broke. we do not have the money to bail out the states. it's time for them to get their arms around their own problems and not look to washington to bail them out. thanks. >> how about internet gambling tax or online sales taxes? >> we don't have a revenue problem in washington, we have a spending problem. and the american people know it. i can't wait now. >> i get so excited. so this is the most -- >> aggressive. >> why did you come back at all? why didn't you just boycott? >> because it's our responsible -- responsibility to come back here and fight against this irresponsible fiscal policy. >> but will you be able to stop it? >> thank you. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010]

[inaudible] >> shockingly we heard the e.p.a. administrator say, make -- [inaudible] i think it would be outrageous

for the congress to take up any major legislation during the lame duck session. >> will there be a debate? >> look, the american people want us to use all of our resources, they want all of the strategies. [inaudible] >> tax laws on the part of tax credits. how can republicans -- [inaudible] >> well, look, the bill -- the suggestion that the bill today is paid for is contaminant out in a family that has -- contaminant mount to a family that -- tantamount to a family

that has a certain amount of debt on one credit card and they transfer it to another credit card and say it's paid for. to take what was already borrowed money and emergency funding and use borrowed money to pay for this is not fiscally responsible and it's just a continuation of the failed economic policies of this congress in the recent past. and also, i have to tell that you a $9 billion tax increase during the worst economy in 25 years is just profoundly wrong. >> wasn't some of that emergency spending for food stamps due to inflation? >> look, house republicans just simply believe that the jury is in on the failed economic policies of this administration and this congress. the american people know that the stimulus, the bailouts, the takeovers, the higher taxes,

have not resulted in economic growth or opportunities. i mean, the hallways at the university at this hour are filled with hundreds of hoosiers that are looking for jobs. the unemployment rate is munsy, indiana, today is the same as it was a year ago and yet congress is doing the same things they were doing a year and a half ago. and the american people know what we've been doing isn't working and yet here we are again back on capitol hill doing more of the same. >> talk about -- you keep calling today's vote a vote for special interests. now, does the american public see teachers as special interests? >> i'm married to a school teacher. who spent a lot of years in a public school classroom. so, look, the state bailout that's being considered on the floor today, benefiting teacher's unions around the

country, public employees around the country, is what it is. but republicans are absolutely determined to stand against this more of the same stimulus spending, bailout approach, higher taxes and say enough is enough. i'll leave that to the pundits, but i'll tell you what, calling us back to do one more bailout and one more tax increase might just be the straw that breaks that majority's camel's back. >> we got to go. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> former alaska senator ted stevens has died in plane crash. we also learned that former nasa chief survived the plane crash along with his son. of senator stevens, the alaska

senator left behind a reputation that have vast state's most spoken advocate in the capitol and a prestigious source of federal largess for his constituents. here's his farewell speech to the senate on november 20, 2008. christmas in 1968, i was appointed to succeed alaska's first senator, our first senior senator, bob bartlett. next month will mark the 40th year that i've had the honor and privilege to serve here in this great chamber. first and most importantly, i want to thank my family. after my wife ann's tragic death in 1978, i thought the end of my career had come. but my dear wife katherine became my wife in 1980 and joined my my six children and my 11 grandchildren, my family has

given me love, support, and sacrifice which made my continued career here in the senate possible and gave it meaning. i dearly love each member of my family. 40 years. it's hard to believe that so much time could pass so quily, but it has. and i want everyone listening to know that i treasure every moment i've spent here representing alaska and alaskans , the land and the people that i love. as a member of this body, and i served as whip from 1976 to 1984, as chair of the republican senatorial campaign committee, as chair of the aways control observer vote, as chairman of the ethics committee, as chair of the rules committee, chair of the government affairs committee, chair of the

appropriations committee and chair of the commerce committee an had fctioned as the political changes took place back and forth across this aisle. now i have really a difficult time today articulating my feelings and i hope if i puddle up as an old friend used to say exile be excused, but when i came to the senate alaska has been a state for less than a decade. we were then more of an impoverished territory than a full-fledged state. the commitments made by the governmentn behalf of alaska were unfulfilled and some are still unfulfilled. alaska had not received things proposed and poverty ruled

supreme and i remember when senator kennedy and i went to examine some of the villains in the arctic -- villains in the arctic it was a disaster. our fisheries were this peril primarily from the intrusion of foreignselves anchored -- foreign vessels anchored a fuel miles offshore 12 months out of the year. many people doubted whether alaska had what it took to be a successful state. and they asked whether alaska was still seward's folly. mr. president, we proved that those doubters were wrong. working with one another as alaskans and with great friends here in the senate alaskans took control of our own destiny. in 1958 as legislative counsel for the department of interior i worked on the statehood act which committed congress to settle alaskan native lapped

claims and in 1971 congress enacted the act settles claims in our states. native corporations established add my request, to manage $1 billion paid to our state and federal government and 44 million acre land settlement are now driving forces in the alaskan economy. in 1973, after a dramatic tie-breaking vote by the vice president of this chamber an amendment which closed the courts of this country to further delay by extreme environmentalists the president signed into law the trans alaska pipeline authorization act which dramatically improved america's energy security and secured the economic future of alaska. in 1976 congress passed what became known as the magnus and stevens act to fight foreign fishing fleets which endangered america's fisheries.

because of that act america's fisheries toda are the most productive and the best managed in the world. workg within the framework of these basic laws, alaskans have labored in the appropriations and administrative process to make statehood a reality. where there was nothing but tundra and forest today there are now airports, roads, ports, water and sewer systems, hospitals, clinics, communications networks, research labs and much, much more. mr. president, alaska was not seward's folly. and is longer an impoverished territory. alaska is a great state and an essential contributor to our energy security and national defense. i am proud to have had a role in this transformation helping achieve alaska's potential will be my life's work.

my motto has been here "to held with -- to hell with politics, just do what is right for alaska." i take great pride in the work of the dense appropriations subcommittee, the leadership of which i have shared for almost three decades with my brother, senator inouye and i thank him for being here. he is a great american patriot and a true friend. together we have word to rebuild our armed forces to provide the support and training needed by our warfighters to meet the challenges of a rapidly changing word. world. i don't have timeo recount the highlights of 40 years of work in this body. that will take a lot time. i will take time, however, for me to acknowledge the friendships i've enjoyed with so many of my colleagues and senate staffers. i really am grateful to every member of the senate for their

friendship and i have no ill will toward any member. i am moment grateful for the support and counsel of my colleagues in the alaska delegation and my old friend in the house, congressman young who has done so much for or state and my partner in the senate, senator murkowski to whom i owe so much and admire so much. she really has been a true friend and a true partner and i really wish her welin the future here. i also acknowledge the tremendous contribution made by hundreds of young alaskans who have come to washington, d.c., to serve on my staff and particularly, let me express my gratitude to my current staff, all of whom have worked hard for alaska during the toughest of times. i know all will go on to do great things for alaska and our country. mr. president, i feel blessed by go to have had the opportunity to serve in this body. i deeply apprecie the trust of alaska reposed in me for 40

years. when alaska needed a strong voice to speak up for its interests, i did my part to the best of mybility. when an administration submitted legislation or a budget that ignored alaa's legislative concerns, i urged congress to exercise its constitutional power to redress the when alaskan -- any alaskan entity needed help my office was read and did help to the maximum extent possible. i feel the same way now that i did in 1968. i really must pinch myself to fully understand that i'm privileged to speak on the floor of the united states senate. coming from a boyhood i had i could never even have dreamed to be here today. and home is where the heart is, mr. president. if that is so, i have two homes: one is right here in this chamber; and the other is my beloved state of alaska.

i must lebanese one -- leave one to return to the other. as i leave the senate and the work that has given me so much happiness i know senators murkowski and congressman young will continue to be strong voices for our 49th state. this is theast frontier and i also pray for my successor's success as he joins in that effort. my mission in life is not completed. i believe god will give me more opportunities to be of service to alaska and to our nation and i look forward with a glad heart and with confidence in his justice and mercy. i look only forward and i still see the day when i can remove the cloud that currently surrounds me. that's it, mr. psident: 40 years distilled into a few minutes. i close by saying and asking god bless alaska and our governor, goes bless the united states of america and our president, and

god bless the senate and every member of this body. i yield the floor for the last time. the presiding officer: the majority leader is recognized.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2010] >> white house press secretary robert gibbs recently gain of an interview to the hill d newspaper in which he takes on the administration's more liberal critics. the interview was one of the main topics at today's briefing with deputy press secretary bill burton. this event had been short -- happened shortly before word that alaska senator ted stevens had died in a plane crash. this is about 45 minutes. >> our thoughts and prayers go out to the families of anybody who was on that aircraft. hopefully we'll have some information soon. >> you don't know senator stevens' stat us? >> i don't. >> has the president been briefed on the crash? >> i'm not 100% sure on that. i'll let you know. >> on another topic, on robert

gibbs' comments on the professional left, you can explain why -- [inaudible] for democrats to be -- [inaudible] who helped get the president-elected in that way? >> i think what gibbs was doing was having one conversation with one reporter and in response to some questions about frustrations answered honestly. i don't think that it should be read as anything more than that. >> did his comments reflect the president's sentiment? >> well, i think -- you washed the coverage, we all watched -- you watched the coverage, we all watched the coverage. when you look at some of the things that had this administration has been able to do from ending the combat mission in iraq to comprehensive health care reform, to equal pay, excuse me, equal pay to financial regulatory he reform, to what we're doing today, to save

160,000 teacher jobs, is there ever some frustration from anyone who works in this building about the way it's being covered? sure, but that doesn't distract us from the work we've got to do to keep the american people safe and keep the american economy growing. , so i would just say that our focus today isn't one article in a hill publication. it's what the president's doing to strengthen the economy. >> but the president during the campaign had made a couple of comments, at least one, asking democrats to hold him accountable when he became president, so how is that not what the left is doing through this criticism? >> president thinks he should be held accountable and at a very high standard. if you look at the things that we've been able to accomplish in just the first 20 months of this administration, he thinks that, you know, by any standard he's done a lot to advance a lot of the goals that americans as a whole have had for in some

cases 100 years when it comes to comprehensive health care reform. so, i would say that the president is not backing away from a desire to be held to a high standard. >> just a follow-up on this professional left comment. has gibbs reached out to anybody in the democratic party to explain what he was getting at with his comments? >> not that i know of. >> ok. moving on to the -- [inaudible] the president made a pitch for that and it does seem like it's probably going it pass. so, he's got that, he's got the extension of unemployment insurance and yet the numbers are still pretty weak on the economy. there are concerns among some that more needs to be done and i'm just wondering, are there ideas in the works, is there a feeling that there's time needed to let these actions take effect or do you feel that there's a need for something

more? >> there's not a person at this white house including the president who's complacent with the progress we've made on the economy. today was a very important step. but the president thinks there's a lot more that we need to do. we should be able to move forward with the small business bill that will help to cut taxes and help create an environment where small businesses can create jobs. he thinks we need to extend the tax cuts for middle class families, to make sure we're putting money in the pockets of folks who will go out and spend it in our economy. and as he's said numerous times we need to increase double exports which we've been able to make some progress on. if you look at the ford plant last week, american manufacturers are making products that people in foreign countries want to buy. we're going to continue to do more and more of that. and the president is of course always looking to more idea wrs we can create more jobs, where we can strengthen this economy. because we were dug into a pretty deep hole. we're digging our way out of it and we're doing everything we

can to speed up that pace. >> some of the critics of the aid to states say that the mandate -- that the condition of some states is various. how concerned is the white house about the lows that states are facing fiscally? >> the president was very concerned that some 160,000 teachers could have lost their jobs had this not passed. so, we're going to do everything we can to make sure that we're in the best economic shape possible to make sure that we're not in a position where teachers and firefighters and cops are being laid off. because that would happen at the expense of our kids, it would happen at the expense of our communities and the president just doesn't think that's the right path forward. >> following up on that, when the president promised today in the rose guard than this bill if passed would bring, he said, quote, hundreds of thousands of additional jobs in the next year, how you can back up that claim when even the white house's own material about this event, some of the teachers

that were appearing with the president, you had to say, they might get their jobs back. there's no guarantee that these teachers are actually going to be rehired. how you can back up the claim that hundreds of thousands of people are going to get that jobs? >> it's in the best economist in the world working at this white house and they've taken a hard look at the numbers, they've take an hard look at state by state what the states need in order to avoid some of these drastic cuts that would take teachers out of our classrooms and take cops and firefighters off of our streets and their confident that those numbers are accurate. >> didn't they say it would bring unemployment down to 7.5%, 8%? >> those same economists were saying a lot of things that economists all over the country were saying at that same time. that was a point at which not many people knew the extent of the damage that was done to the economy or how deep the hole was going to get. but we've been able to make a lot of progress since then. but like i said before, the pace hasn't been fast enough and the president's going to continue to work to make sure we're strengthening the economy in every way we can. >> he doesn't seem to be backing away from them at all.

does this white house believe that some liberals need to be drug tested for their criticism of -- >> [laughter] i didn't back off of what gibbs said and i think he was making a light joke there. >> so they literally don't want them drug tested? [laughter] >> i don't know if you have time later on today or a syringe. >> part of the congressional left. >> wikileaks is recording the drug testing, but in all seriousness, wikileaks is reporting that this administration is pressing some key allies to launch their own investigations of wikileaks, open criminal investigations of its founder. why is the white house expanding this? is there a fear that more memos are coming out? what's the thinking on this? >> i'm not familiar with the government pressing other nations to press criminal charges. no, what i said is i wasn't familiar with that.

obviously this is a very serious breach and as we've said before, it put lives in danger and we're cutting -- conducting our own investigation here in the united states government. but anything like that that's happening government to government i can check on that for you. >> charlie rangel today took to the house floor and complained that some fellow democrats were trying to push him out before he's had a fair day, he believes in, -- believes, in court. he said, take your best shot. you're not going to tell me to resign just to make democrats comfortable. is there any regrets about trying to push charlie rangel out before he has a chance to answer these charges? >> for starters i saw charlie rangel speaking live on cable. but i didn't hear everything that he to say. so i can't speak specifically to what he said. as the white house said before, the president said before, there's a bipartisan process in place that's working its way forward and we're just not going to be in the business of

prejudging the process they're going through to answer what are some pretty serious questions. like i said earlier, what we're focused orb -- >> don't you think it would be good for charlie rangel to have some dignyny is it >> no. what we're focused on is how we're going to get teachers back in their classrooms and cops and firefighters on the street. >> nobody wants to fire teachers or firefighters or police officers but what about the republican complaint that you're just kick the can down the road, that this is pressing this news button on the problem that is inevitable? >> i guess we just disagree with the premise that we have to inevitably let 160,000 teachers go. that we have to make our streets less safe by taking cops and firefighters off them. that we can't help out some of these states to keep these jobs and to keep our economy growing. this was done in the most fiscally responsible way. it's all paid for in part by ending foreign tax cuts and the president's view is that we've got to do all we can to keep

people in their jobs and keep our economy growing. that's our charge right now when we're in this economic mess. >> a number of republican governors we've spoken to today say they might not take the money. what do you say to that? >> i would say that they should take any assistance that they can get to keep teachers in their classrooms. this is bigger than an ideological fight. it's bigger than just right and left politics. when it comes to teaching our kids, it's about making our nation competitive in the long-term. the president's speech yesterday i think is very important on this point. we cannot have a situation where america is continuing to decline as it relates to math and science and all the other different aspects. if we aren't continuing to compel, if we aren't graduating kids from college, we're going to be outcompeted in the future and the president just doesn't think that that's something that's right. >> do you foresee other sort of emergency injections of money like this down the line? at what point does it stop? there are other priorities that could be just as important in

keeping kids in school. at some point you have to say, ok, some fiscal responsibility here? >> of course the president is for fiscal responsibility and that's why he did this in such a way that this is all paid for. it does not add to the deficit and it's critically important that people understand that. this is a commonsense measure that's going to keep people in their jobs, that's going to keep teachers in the classroom and it's going to help our economy. >> people who are receiving -- [inaudible] >> i'm sorry? >> some of the money is coming from not fully funding food stamps. >> well, i think that, you know, when you look at how the money's broken down and where it goes, this money is going to go to the people who are affected the most by this lagging economy. and the lion share of how this is paid for is foreign tax cuts that we're eliminating. did you have a follow-up on that? >> if a state like illinois

still has $670 million of education stimulus money that it's been allotted that it hasn't spent, why doesn't it use that money before you give it more? >> a lot of these -- what we did was we looked at what was the most responsible way to repurpose some of the stimulus money? in this specific case there was an opportunity to pay for part of what we're doing with that money. now, the vast majority of the stimulus has already been spent. it's either out the door or it's allocated to specific project or it's going to go out in the form of a tax cut that people are going to get in their paycheck. we don't think that we should turn any of that around. we can't take one job creation program and eliminate it and create it at the expense of another that we're eliminating. we need to build on the progress that we're making. so, in this case we think that we found the right formula to do this in the most fiscally responsible way. >> wait a minute. >> the figures of illinois still has $670 million, west

virginia has $274 million of unspent in the education money that they've already been given. >> i'm not necessarily disputing those numbers. i haven't seen specifically where those numbers come from. but i will say that in this specific case what we're concerned about, what we're focused on is making sure that this money is being spent in the most responsible way, that we are making sure that we're not eliminating some program at the expense of another. so, like i said, i don't know where you got that specific number from. i don't necessarily doubt it. but what we need to do is make sure that we're not eliminating something just because may be the money's still in the bank account but it hasn't been spent on this specific program that its allocated for at the expense of another program. >> real quick. you guys have opposed redirection of the stimulus money in the past. i'm just wondering, what's changed in this instance? there have been efforts on both sides oost toil -- of the aisle to pay for unemployment benefits and other things in the past. you guys have resisted. that i'm just wondering why --

>> right. and i think i just addressed that. in this specific instance we thought that we found a way to spend this money on a new program that would help to build on the success that we've had. but like i said, most of the money is either gone or allocated and there aren't going to be a lot of opportunities for something like that in the future. >> those numbers are part of the reason the critics are saying that maybe this money that is being appropriated isn't all needed and that you're doing this primarily to please the teacher's unions in advance of november elections. >> i would say that that is an awfully cynical take on what we're doing which which they -- which we think is -- >> that hasn't been used and could be with these teacher's salaries. >> if teachers are being laid off, it's not because there's extra money around that they could just put towards those teachers and stick them in those jobs. teachers are being laid off because states are in economic crises. and what the president is doing here is everything that he can to make sure that teachers stay in these deloorges firefighters

and cops stay on the streets and that our economy keeps growing. but this is -- i would urge you not to think that this is by any means anything other than exactly what it is. >> when gibbs made his comment about -- or the president rather made his comment about charlie rangel, he did seem to be suggesting that he ought to retire with dignity and it was taken that way by many of us. has he expressed any further opinion on the fact that mr. rangel isn't ready to retire yet? >> what the president -- i think the president's words speak for themselves. >> we do, too. >> and -- [laughter] and i talked about this right afterwards. and like we said, we're not prejudging the outcome of this bipartisan process. the president was asked a question he answered it.

and i've made crystal clear on numerous occasions that we're not prejudging that process. >> the house passed board of security measure today, does the president think this shows the democrats' commitment to boarder security that republicans feel is lacking? >> well, what i can tell you is that there's likely nothing that the president's going to do that is going to silence all the critics when it comes to the boarder -- border. but what i will say is that the president has put more assets on the border than have ever been there before. but that immigration as an issue needs to be addressed in a comprehensive fashion. that's exactly what he's been working to do with both democrats and republicans and unfortunately without the sort of republican support that would be necessary in order to move it forward. >> would you expect that the passage of this bill will increase republican support for comprehensive immigration reform? >> you'd have to ask

republicans. >> on secretary gates' announcement yesterday, the president commits the savings in the pennsylvania's budget such as they are to reducing the deficit, would he basically place those savings offlimits for increased spending? >> i don't know exactly how those moneys are going to be allocated. i'll get back to you. but the president thinks that secretary gates has been pretty courageous in making pretty tough choices as it relates to finding ways to modernize our nation's defenses but do it in the most fiscally responsible of ways. it's something we've got to do across this budget. but on the specific question i think -- >> i mean, it's in the spirit of fiscal responsibility that i would ask, you know, whether the -- >> i understand the question that you're asking. and i'm telling that you if there's a specific allocation for that we'll get back to you.

>> robert's definition of -- [inaudible] >> i think that the way i took it, i haven't spoken with robert yet today. i think he was talking about folks who mostly live in this town and talk to cable tv. >> do you want to address -- [inaudible] today? conspiracy theories that are going to be out there, considering he has been a topic of question? >> sure. the promise that drug makers have not found a sudafed strong enough for robert gibbs. he's upstairs probably watching me talk to you with a sore throat and the sniff -- sniffleless. >> charlie rangel, going on the charlie rangel situation, he directly quoted the president, word dignity, three different times. he said, make a dignyified exit would be expulsion from congress. it was not a -- it was in a not

so sult reference to the president's quotes. is congressman rangel interpreting -- >> i saw that he was talk bug i didn't hear a thing that he said. i'm not qualified to speak -- i appreciate that. one more. >> sorry. it's me. >> fight amongst yourselves. >> you go ahead. >> no, i was going to say -- on rangel, that their words speak for themselves what the president said but i can think of two different widely diversive interpretations what have the president said. didn't -- did he mean for rangel to resign? >> i've been clear about this numerous times before and today. there's a process in place. and the process -- in that bipartisan process serious questions are being asked and answered about some charges that have been leveled against congressman rangel. the president's view is that

we're not going to prejudge that process. >> president came out of the rose garden to talk about education funding. i assume the white house was not expecting congressman rangel to spend an hour on the house floor talking about education? >> if he checked his speaking schedule with anybody here i didn't know about it. >> on the stimulus, you guys have made a big deal with the become the -- about the fact that you guys are paying for this $26 billion increase. you guys are going to push for an extension of this, at least the middle class tax cuts. are you committed to pay-go in that process? >> i don't have anything new for you. i know this has been -- this has been discussed at length in this room. but i don't have anything for you on that. >> you guys haven't made a decision about whether extending the middle class tax cuts should be paid for? >> i'm just not going to break into that for you today.

all right. >> i have three. i have three questions. on the professional left, i've been watching robert's twitter feed all morning and it's pretty intense the reaction. is he aware of that? what's the reaction to that? does he feel bad about it? >> i'll be honest and i don't have anything on gibbs' reaction to the twitter feed. >> and the second question is, one of the things i've been reading is that, you know, the professional left, in issues like shirley sherrod, acorn, the administration seems to be more responsive to the professional right than the professional left. do you have any response to that? >> that's sort of an question. what the president is most response to have is the needs of our country. he's focused on, how do we grow our economy, how do we educate our kids? i wouldn't say that that's particularly right or left. >> and finally, was the

president angry about the uproar surrounding michelle's trip to spain? >> not think a know of. -- that i know of. >> a couple of things. the panama city trip this weekend, what you can tell us about what the president and his family will do there and since we're on the topic of vacations, why only one night? >> i checked into the itinerary right before i came out here. unfortunately i don't have anything to announce for you. hopefully later in the week we'll have more about what they'll be doing in and around panama city. >> [inaudible] we were told some -- [inaudible] >> i don't think that that's changed but i don't have any specific itinerary information. >> the whole family is going? is that correct? >> i don't know -- i'm not sure if one of the daughters is back from camp just yet. >> will the president d be doing any politicking in

florida? >> there's no time for that. on the 18th he'll be down there for a fundraiser for the florida democratic party that will help all the candidates. >> just following on the discussion on the teacher's announcement. you know, at what point does the president say that the government cannot continue to inject money into the economy to prop up public sector jobs? will there be a point where he will finally say, ok, we're going to draw the line and this is enough? >> well, the president's view is that you have to look at a wide range of economic issues that we're dealing with individually. and in individual cases if there's opportunities for us in a fiscally responsible way to inject some money and save some jobs, the president's going to want to keep doing that if it's possible. but if people are promoting methods that aren't fiscally responsible, he won't be supportive of that. he understands that we're in an economic crisis right now, we

have to do what we can to create an environment where people are creating jobs. but he also understands that we have some pretty serious fiscal issues as a country and that's something that he's taking on as well. that's what you saw secretary gates doing. that's what he's doing across government with some of the cost controlling measures. >> couldn't you argue that he has a way to reduce the deficit by ending these tax loopholes, businesses that ship jobs overseas, that he could do that and just reduce the deficit? he's making a choice here, right? >> you got to make some pretty hard choices when you're president of the united states. his view is that there are dollars, that there are dollars that can be fiscally responsibly spent in order to save or create jobs. if there's ways that we can improve our economic outlook, if there's things that we can do to help an industry be more successful, then we've got to look at all those, all the means at our disposele in order to grow our economy. >> is it possible we'll see more steps like this? >> it's possible we'll see a

lot more steps where the president tries to save and create more jobs. >> back to the question about the frustration inside the white house, you talked about, with, i guess the professional left. you sort of danced around the question of the president himself. and said there are people -- are there people in this building who are frustrated? sure. do you know if the president himself is upset with and frustrated like gibbs apparently was with people on the left not acknowledging how many victories, how many accomplishments this president has made? >> for one, i think it's possible to overstate this conversation that gibbs had with a reporter and, two, that -- just to overstate the importance of this conversation and sometimes, i'm just -- sometimes in this room a lot of people can ask questions about things and it seems like this

upswell of interest or importance of an issue. but in this case, in this very specific issue that you asked about, what i said in response to the question was that, yeah, every single person in this building, including the one who lives here, at times can be frustrated with the way some of the things are covered here. but it's a pretty -- it's pretty minor compared to the hard work that we're actually doing and the commitment we have here at this white house, starting with the president of the united states, to stay focused on the things that are important to this country. mainly, keeping the american people safe and building this economy. and so regardless of the questions about this, regardless of the impact of the article, we're going to keep focused on the things that are important to the american people. >> i guess my question was -- purposely didn't mention the article. many of us have heard that kind of frustration expressed in this building before. it's not -- he said it in a way

that was particularly headline grabbing. but i guess the question is, you know, does that -- is that frustration building as you get closer to the elections, that the string of things what that i think you even mentioned in your answer the first time, things you have accomplished, that that is not appreciated enough by the people who help the president get elected? >> i would say that any level of frustration that anybody here in this white house has is extraordinarily minimal compared to the focus that people have on the work that they're doing. roger. >> i'd like to turn to the flooding in afghanistan and pakistan. >> yeah. >> what there have been power disruptions, energy dispruppingses -- disruptions. millions of people have been discloketted -- dislocated. what type of effect does that have on the military campaign? you can talk about that?