promote the small business jobs act. those were great cornerstones of development that allow us to grow jobs and as we know, we've had 10 consecutive months of private sector job growth. we've now surpassed the million-mark for private sector jobs. that's a great accomplishment in light of the 8.2 million lost in the bush recession and speaking of president bush's track record, they were losing jobs. they were losing -- we had netzero gain of private sector jobs during thatted administration. this one million is a great mark as we move forward in this calendar year to turn this country around and we need to just continue along that road of progress system of it's great you've brought us together and i'm happy to join you during this hour. mr. garamendi: thank you, mr. tonko, i know you have to leave in a few moments but you reminded me of one of these little charts i often have here, this one does show what

you just talked about. displays bush years, the enormous losses of jobs. right down here at the bottom, that's when the obama administration started in 2009. and each month thereafter, each quarter, we saw an improvement. we didn't see the jobs coming back in the private sector until the last several months but clearly in the last several months, those jobs are there. the unemployment rate has not dropped, because it is the government jobs that are now being lost, but nonetheless, a net gain in the jobs -- mr. tonko: absolutely, the progress we wanted to witness. it's never fast enough after we lost 8.2 million jobs. and american households loss $18.5 trillion. that was pain that was very deep

and dark and it's never fast enough, but it is a rise in the right direction and a movement that continues to that road of progress. mr. garamendi: you raised a very important part, the industrial strength of america has almost always occurred as a result of the research and innovation that has been the hallmark of america. you mentioned the competes act which deals with energy, research in the united states, scientific research, an extremely important one and unfortunately our republican colleagues refoogs refused to support that people. we had enough democrats to move the bill out. also, as i recall, i wasn't here but you were here at the time, it was the american recovery and reinvestment act, otherwise known as the stimulus bill that created the largest increase in scientific research ever in

america's history. the public may not appreciate it, but that research is finding its way into every part of industrial research. two things happened, scientists, technicians, lab teches, engineers were employed. they had jobs. and they were developing the future industries of america. enough from me. let me turn to turn to my colleague from the midwest, mr. ellison, you have a very important part of the country. wasn't friendly to our democrats but friendly to you because of your outstanding leadership. but share your experience. mr. ellison: let me thank you for holding down this special order and congratulate you and congressman tovencow in california. you all conveyed theessage and i congratulate your success from our side of the aisle.

i have to be here for a short while tonight. i wanted to share a few moments with you, the speaker and the american people and talk about this importance to maintain and hold on to that vision of making it in america. we did it before and do it again but it's going to take some things. some investment in education. it's going to take some investment in our nation's infrastructure. going to take some real investment in our small businesses so they can get it moving. and it's going to take some real investment in our belief in our selfs to reclaim this mantle of manufacture for the world. this can happen. we done it before. america is still the leading manufacturer on the world. we have seen other nations creeping up on us. we can do it. in the last congress, actually in this congress, we made

tremendous investments and as you already pointed out, the american recovery and reinvestment act. we call it stimulus for shorthand. but it was reinvestment. reinvestment is one of the r's in that american recovery and reinvestment act. i want the people to bear in mind, investment is what we needed so we can continue our upward trajectory. i hope our friends on the other side of the aisle continue this effort to try to reinvent america for the sake of manufacturing. we'll see. but the fact is this will democratic congress put this country on a platform and a foundation for future growth in jobs and manufacturing. mentioned a moment ago, the

reinvestment act, not only do we invest in scientific research but in infrastructure and in our health care bill. we invested in making sure that we had the educational wherewithal to take care of our people into the future, tremendous investments in education for medical education so we can take care of our people. that again, will fuel manufacturing, because part of manufacturing is medical device manufacturing, so that we have the educational talent to make those instruments that are lifesaving in this world. you put the health care bill together with the recovery act, what you are talking about is a recipe for making things that will help lifesaving research in place through american innovation and manufacturing. i just want to commend you for being down here week after week, whether you have a bunch of people helping you or by

yourself, you have an enduring commitment to make sure the american people know that american manufacturing is not declining. it has been, but doesn't have to be declining in america. it can be going up in america if we make the investments in education and research and things we talked about earlier. i'm so proud to be from the state of minnesota. we had a little bit of snow there. it's light fluffy stuff, but the fact is, we even in the state of minnesota are investing in wind. we are investing in biofuels, investing in all sorts of green- energy-producing methods. we will be manufacturing new technology and also transmission lines to transfer the energy that we make based on our

innovation. in the course of our time between august and now, we have been home alone working hard, back in our districts. and i had the opportunity, congressman, to go to a number of manufacturing companies in mill district, 10k solar. they are many minnesota, a cutting-edge solar manufacturing company. other companies making fascinating things with wind technology. and this is the kind of thing we want to stimulate. and this will continue to make america the great economic power it has been. and i just hope we can get some real bipartisan cooperation to continue this drive so we can continue to make america that country that is the envy of the world. so, unfortunately, congressman, i have to leave you to carry the weight tonight. but i thank you for your commitment and just say that i draw inspiration from the

pictures you are about to explain right now. mr. garamendi: mr. ellison, thank you so very much. we just come back to re-organize ourselves and to go forward. earlier today, we selected our minority leader for the next year, our current speaker, nancy pelosi. and as she left the caucus today, she very clearly laid out an agenda for the democratic party. that agenda was make it in america, manufacturing matters and take care of the middle class. these two things go together. if we're going to have a robust economy, if we're going to be able to move up the employment and reduce the unemployment in america, then we must make it in america. as we do that, we will recreate those very, very important,

critical middle-class jobs. there is a whole strategy that is under way here. i used to play football back at the university of california a few years back and did fairly well at it, but there's an analogy we need to keep in mind here to the current economic situation here in america. let's envision that the first quarter was the eight years of the bush administration. what happened? well, i had a chart up here a few moments ago and maybe i ought to put it back up. the first eight years of the bush administration, be with me for a moment here, were the years of the first quarter. what happened? it was a wipeout. it was horrible. the american team was december mated. we were on our backs and losing 800,000 jobs a month in the last year of the bush administration.

it was eight million jobs lost. second quarter, we brought in the obama team. didn't start off too good. first few minutes of that quarter were rough, but it was an improvement. each quarter that went by, we saw an improvement. and by the end of the second quarter, we were building jobs. we were building jobs in the private sector. now, into the second half. we're into the second half of the obama administration. what's going to happen? the obama team is still on the field. the president's in place. we have a strong minority position going forward in the democratic caucus. our republican colleagues will take over the management of the house and we'll see how that goes. on the senate side, the

democrats are still fl. let's continue the second half as the democratic half. here's our plan. we're going to develop strategies, many of them already in place to make it in america so that america can make it and it is based on this, manufacturing matters. that was the speaker's message. the minority message going forward in this house next year will be make it in america so that americans can make it. it's important to be able to take that pay check home. my daughter, oldest daughter, now a little bit older, i should say more than a little, i'll never forget the day she came back from her first summer job. she came back and showed us her check. held it up like that and said, dad, i have my first pay check. she was proud. she was so proud that she was a

working american. and i know for those millions of americans out there today that can't find a job, they want to come back to their home with their check and tell their children i'm back at work and working again. i can take care of you. i can provide for your education. i can put the food on the table. that's what they want. and we have a strategy in mind on the democratic side that will do that. this first quarter that i was talking about, the strategy was basically to increase the wealth of the wealthy, to start two wars and never pay for them, and to take the referees off of the playing field and let it rip. and we were ripped. wall street just went crazy with ultimate greed and the result,

we should have expected it. you take the referees off the field, take the rule book, throw it off into the shower and what is going to happen in an nfl football game? well, that's what happened when wall street was allowed to run amuck during the george w. bush years. it was the democrats in this house, in the senate, that laid out a structure to stabilize the financial industry. we'll probably get the money back in the years ahead. it was stabilized. not as good as we would want, but it was stabilized. and then the next piece was brought forward, which was the american recovery and reinvestment act. by all accounts, by learned

economists, three million jobs were created or saved as a result of that. and that wasn't the only piece of legislation. there was in that piece of legislation, reinvestment in science and technology and research, reinvestment in our roads and streets and bridges, building the foundation for the future of america. followed fop lo -- followed up later in this session with legislation called the hire act to put people back to work, to give businesses the financial incentive to hire people to bring people back onto the payroll. subsidizing those rehires so that people can take that paycheck home and say, dear, i'm back at work, i've got a job again. that's what americans want. the democrats were delivering that. the last piece of legislation

before we went into the election was a piece of legislation to help the governments of america, the cities, the counties, the states, keep people employed in the essential jobs that are the public sector jobs, police, fire, teachers, in california alone, 16,000 teachers are in the classroom this year as a result of that piece of legislation. we want people to work. we put those bills on the floor, some were actually passed by the senate, much to our delight, but many were not. there were many pieces of legislation passed here without republican support that nonetheless were an effort on our part to put people back to work. weir going to take this thing further in the years -- in the year ahead and up through the next session of congress. let me put this up here for you

to see. my colleague, mr. ellison, was talking about wind turbines and photovoltaic. interesting. not many of these are made in america nowadays. most of them are imported. wind turbines from europe and china. photo voltaic cells now mostly from china. buses from europe and other places. we can make these things in america. we can make these things in america because we once made them in america. in my own district in the fairfield-sombings lano county area. we used to make a lot of solar panels. in the bay area, there's still a bus manufacturer, one of the few left in america that produces bus, the gilly corporation. i'll never forget the day i went out to visit the wind farm in solano county and talked to

the companies putting those wind turbines up. i asked them, boy, that's quite a tower, 400 feet high, a lot of steel. >> oh, yeah. we bring that in from korea. >> that's interesting. and those blades stretching out the length of a football field. 300 feet. >> oh, yeah -- oh, yeah, those are brought in from europe right now. maybe we can begin to manufacture those once again in colorado. all the gearboxes and all the electronics, all of it imported. i told them, i said, you want me to continue to support american tax money subsidizing your wind turbines and your business and you want those things made overseas? well, they don't make it in america anymore. i said, well, let me put it to you this way. if you want my help, if you

want american taxpayer money for subsidies, then you damn well better make it in america, otherwise our tax money ought not to be used to support industries overseas. if it's private money do what you want to do. if you want to buy a turbine from europe, fine, if you want to buy a turbine from japan or china, fine but use your own money, don't use american taxpayer money. unfortunately, far too much of that has gone on in the years of the past. i've introduced legislation and others are are following along, that our tax money is going, no longer overseas for buses, for bridges, steel, for photovoltaic systems, for wind turbines. our tax money, when these democratic bills pass this house and the senate and are

signed by president obama, our tack money will be used to support american industry. think of what that means. we spend $4 billion a year buying tax moneys, our tax money, our gas tax money. where is it going now? a lot of it is going overseas for foreign-made buses and trains and equipment we don't want that anymore. in the american recovery and reinvestment act, some $12 billion was set aside for high speed rail and a sentence was added to that particular piece of the bill, and it said that when high speed rail is built in america, it will be built in america by american manufacturers. there were some companies overseas that build high speed rail systems. some of them whined, others of them said if that's where the money is, that's the requirement, then we will build

the semens high speed rail system in -- the siemens high speed rail system in america. it makes a difference how you write laws. the laws we write to use our gasoline to buy buses, trains, other kinds of rolling stock, and to build bridges and to build highways, that's our gas tax money, that's our diesel tax money, then spend that money on american-made equipment whether it's a bus a high speed rail, again, you want to use your private money, you want to buy a mercedes-benz, go for it, but not our tax money. it also applies in the area of energy policy. in the american recovery and reinvestment act, there were substantial subsidies for wind and solar and green technology of all kinds, nuclear and the rest.

good. we need to change our energy policy. we have to move away from our dependence on coal and oil. into new renewable technologies that do not contaminate our atmosphere with carbon dioxide. are we going to do that successfully if we allow our tax money, our subsidies to be spent on equipment made overseas? i don't think so. i don't think so at all. that's our money, we spend it in the future on american made equipment of all kinds. that should be our policy, that's legislation i've introduced, legislation i strongly supported and i dare say it's legislation that will be a major part of make it in america, the democratic agenda to rebuild the manufacturing secondor of this nation. there's another piece of this puzzle we need to keep in mind, that's tax policy. a lot of discussion during the

campaign and a lot of democrats lost their jobs on this issue. it's the big d, it's the deficit. a lot of our republican colleagues, rightfully, said the deficit is a problem. you can talk about keynesian, countercyclical economic policy and all the rest and i happen to believe that when the economy is going in the tank, countercyclical measures, keynesian, using the government, purchasing to encourage the growth of the economy to stabilize the economy, unemployment insurance that provide a foundation are extremely important and we will soon on this floor and over in the senate take up the extension of the unemployment insurance. i know republican colleagues are opposed to this. people will go out and find a

job. even if republicans lost this job in -- their job in this election, we'll see if they get unemployment insurance, they may well apply for it, maybe some of my democratic colleagues will also. but that keeps food on the table, keeps families together and provides the shelter necessary because the jobs are not yet there because these policies are just now going into legislation and eventually into the law and into place. the deficit. what are we going to do about the deficit. we have to get the economy going. that, economists say is the most critical part of dealing with the deficit. if the economy doesn't grow, the deficit can't be dealt with. so we grow the economy. policies such as we've talked about here are a way of doing it. there's another thing about the deficit that needs to be taken into account. that's where did it come from?

here's a fact. the day that george w. bush took office, in january of 2001, he was handed a $230 billion surplus. today -- the day that president barack obama took office, he was handed a $1,300,000,000 deficit. why did that occur? poe the policies. they let wall street run amok, the housing industry run amok without any rules, all that was part of it but that was -- but there were other. the tax cuts of 2003 added billions, maybe trillions to the deficit. and the iraq war and afghanistan war, two wars that

were financed by borrowing money from china. adding to the deficit. those are the realities. the deficit is part of the economy now, it's part of our fiscal situation, it started, grew, manifested itself in the george w. bush years and now we need to work our way out of it. how are we going to do that? how do we work our way out of this deficit? with policies like make it in america, clearly important. the countercyclical measures, providing unemployment insurance, using the power of government to bring job into reality, all of those are important. tax policy also. a big debate will occur in this chamber in the days ahead. before december 31, a debate will occur as to what will be the tax policy of the united states. the george w. bush tax cuts i

talked about a moment ago that created a large part of that deficit are up for debate because they expire on december 31, 2010. the expiration of those tax cuts, most of which went to the wealthy, are going to be up for debate. our republican colleagues want to expand all of the tax breaks . the democrats, president obama, and the rest of us, have a different idea. we think the deficit is really important. we believe that we have to address the deficit. the extension of all of the bush tax cuts will significantly increase the

deficit. now, on the democratic side, we believe that the tax cuts to the middle class are extremely important because they give the middle class the opportunity to have a larger paycheck, less taxes taken out so that homeowners can pay the mortgage. put the food on the table. provide for their families. give the kids the books, the backpacks, the things they need to go to school. that's our view. the tax cut should be extended for the middle class. let's look what happens in a very, very important policy discussion between the democrats and the republicans about taxes. a lot of bubbles on this page but these bubbles represent

real money. the george w. bush tax cuts have this effect for those people learning $10,000 or more, they'll get $52 in reduced taxes. so it goes, let's say a person is earning $75,000 a year. they'll get $ 1rks800 of tax cuts. then, it continues to grow. the more income you have, the more wealth you have, the greater the break. the greater the tax cut for you. so that by the time you are a millionaire, your average tax reduction is $17,000. under the george w. bush -- that's average. that's between $500,000 and $1,000. but if you're a millionaire and you have a million dollars,

adjustable tax, you will receive an enormous benefit. then if you get up to the ga silnaries -- gazillionaires, this is where you are. the democrats have a different idea. our idea is that every taxpayer, the very wealthy and the those who are making just $10,000 a year, should receive a tax break on the first $200,000 that an individual makes and $250,000 for a couple filing a joint tax return. let me make that clear. every taxpayer gets a tax break. a tax break -- taxpayer gets a tax break up to $200,000 for a individual and $250,000. what's wrong with that?

millionaires and billionaires gets a tax reduction. and this is our plan. but for those who are very, very wealthy, those who are making over $250,000, $500,000, $1 million, $1 billion, we think they have an obligation to america and they should not receive a continuation of the tax break that they have had for the last several years. this kind of a tax break. so we would suggest that the tax break go back to what it was before 2001. in the case of those earning up to $1 million, it would go from 33% to 36%. oh my goodness, a 3% increase. how horrible. i think not. what does that amount to somebody making $1 million, 3%,

$30,000, that's not going to bust their checking account. but it will be important if you are concerned about the deficit. if you care about the deficit, you ought to be caring about this, because here's where the real money is, right here. for those earning for the tax breaks to continue, we are talking about $700 billion of increased deficit. can't have it both ways here. cannot have it both ways. if you are concerned about the deficit and why in the world would you want those those people who are not hungry, who are not homeless, who are not working in our manufacturing plants, why would you want them to be responsible for increasing the deficit? well, perhaps, because that's your constituency.

that's not our constituency. the democratic constituency is the hard-working middle class, that will get a tax break, a continuation of what they had the last seven years. this is important. this is about the deficit. remember, every taxpayer in america gets a tax break up to $200,000 or $250,000. they get a break. but if you are above that, your adjusted gross income above $250,000, that amount up to $1 million, you will pay 3% more. for a billionaire, it will be more dollars. but the increase is only going to be 4-plus percent. this isn't going to bust their bank or hurt small business. small business is not impacted

except for just 3% of the small businesses in america, meaning this proposal that the democrats are going to put forward will provide a tax break for 97% of small bunesses, will not increase their taxes for 97% of small businesses. for 3%, and here's the definition of small businesses, the world's largest construction company in california, is by the definition that the republicans use, a small business. billions of dollars of annual income. it's a small business. i think not. but that's the republican definition. now, one of my colleagues earlier tonight did a little thing that i just have to do again, because it is very illuminating, so let me do that.

i'll take down our pal message. make it in america, manufacturing matters. if america is going to make it, we must make it in america. i was talking a moment ago about the bush tax cuts. here's what it means. the republican plan if the bush tax cuts are extended will, cut taxes for the rich an average of $83,347 a year. $83,347 a year, the average tax reduction for the 1% wealthiest americans, 1% wealthiest americans. well, what does that mean? well, it means that for the next

decade they will be able to buy an $83,000 mercedes benze-class for the next year or maybe they want to buy their wife, girlfriend, whatever a modest, a hermes, $64,000, every year. that's a lot of purses for the next 10 years. if that's not susht. would like to -- sufficient, would like to characterize these fat cats with their cigars. these are top line cigars and

can buy 800 cigars every year. and that's not all. , they can light those cigars with $100 bill, 800 a year, and 800 100 bills to light it. i see my colleague paul tonko has returned. here's the alternative, americans. here's the alternative to the republican plan. instead of giving $83,000 a year to the wealthiest 1% of americans, you can take that same amount of money and give a $30,000 a year job to three

million americans. our work is about choices. our work is about values and frankly our work is about morality. tell me what is the morality of allowing the richest 1% of americans to buy 800 cigars a year and light those cigars with $100 bills, $83,000 347 in tax reductions versus three million americans, three million unemployed americans who have a family, who are losing their home, who cannot provide food if the republicans are able to block the extension of the unemployment insurance. this is a moral question. this is a question of what is right and wrong in america. this tax cut shows the dividing

line about where you stand in america. where do you stand? are you with the richest 1% so they can go out and buy a mercedes e-class vehicle every year or do you stand with families and want to put a pay check on the table? i think it's pretty clear. mr. tonko, thank you for rejoining us. mr. tonko: thank you for your enlightening discussion on job creation and making it in america and tax policies that can i am power our middle class. strengthening of the middle class and enabling them to have more purchasing power has got to be the guiding force as we continue to do work in the closing stages of the 111th congress and move into the next

stages. it is what everyone heard on the campaign field this past fall and summer. people were concerned about the economy. and again, we have surpassed that one million accounts for new jobs in the private sector realm. but after 8.2 million jobs lost, it isn't get us there quickly enough. i understand the i am patience and the fear. people need to have a job, dignity to have work enenables them ownership and aloug them to encourage their children and pursue their careers through perhaps higher education. it's important that we respond to that dynamic. i think there are some telling stats, statistics that are really highlighting the concern

that people are expressing these days. some 83% of all united states' stocks are in the hands of 1% of the public. now, that is a very lopsided statistic. we are also told that some 61% of americans always or usually live pay check to pay check, that is up from 49% just a year ago. and 43%, just two years ago. so that climb from 43% to 49% to 61% to those who usually live pay check to pay check is a concern or at least ought to be a concern to the members of this body. and so it's important for us to make certain that we break some of those barriers and allow for some of the benefit to flow to the middle class.

66% of the income growth between 2001 and 2007 went to the top 1% of all americans. and when we look at the difference between the obama tax cuts and the bush tax cuts, the bush cuts are owed money from china to enable us to give, as a government, the top percent of wealth, top 1% or 2% of america to receive their tax cuts. we borrowed and it was off budget. we borrowed to pay for a tax cut, to spend for a tax cut for the wealthiest of americans. when we look at the obama tax cut, it was the largest historic tax cut for middle-income america. mr. garamendi: that was in the american recovery and reinvestment act? mr. tonko: absolutely. a fact missed on many out there. it was the largest such tax cut

for middle-income america, a historic statement, compared to, you compare that obama tax cut to the bush tax cut that borrowed that spent to the tax cut for the wealthiest americans. we shouldn't be surprised when we see these sfats, more purchasing power for the wealthiest who have the purchasing of stocks out there. 1% reflecting the 83% of all united states' stocks. so we need to do better than that. and i would suggest that is income strata. you need someone to purchase your products. you need someone to build your products, manufacture your products, we need a strong middle class and invest in that opportunity and i think all of that recovery that we are hoping for becomes all the more expedited and it was shown to us in the clinton years by

producing jobs, you solve the nation's deficit. president clinton inherted a deficit from the first bush administration and handed over a $5.6 billion surplus to the next administration. and then what did we inhirt, but a record deficit that was passed onto the obama administration at their beginnings in 2009 that was more painful than the consequences in the past 17 years. the track record is such you have seen democrats working with the democratic administration to build us out of deficit situations, create a surplus and have it spent down again and giving priorities to those economic engines that don't work. when the obama tax cut, historically large for the

middle class was implemented, we saw what the economists from far right thinking to far left thinking as a team has suggested would happen, we actually saw that happen. and these economists were right on. as soon as the middle class was given its tax cut, that tax cut was spent back in the regional economy. and we saw the beginning of the end of that bleeding of the recession. it ended the bleeding simply by creating that recovery and having those dollars recirculate across the country and they proved that the bleeding of that recession had stopped and it empowered the middle class, the economics of it all to work. we can take lessons from history, take that obama tax cut and contrast it with the bush tax cut and see what really happened. your whole statement about those thresholds, those

households of $250,000 or less, with that as the threshold, we can see the empowerment that comes when we concentrate on that portion of the tax cut that i believe will have a trickle down value. the $700 billion price tag on the upper income strata in terms of spending on a tax cut for the that strata is a hefty one and we need to understand, analytically understand what the payback would be. what's the dividend? is there a lucrative dividend by spending that much money on that strata of tax cuts. >> thank you, mr. tonko. if you or anyone cares about the deficit you need to pay close attention to this debate that is going to happen here in this chamber, here in washington, d.c., in the days and weeks ahead, and that is, do we give an enormous tax break to the wealthiest america

and in doing so increase the deficit by $700 billion or do we limit the tax break to all taxpayers up to $250,000, extremely important debate that will take place, for me, it's time to think about the deficit, it's time to get real about the deficit and if you care about the deficit if you care about growing the economy, the point you just made, then limit the tax deduction -- reduction, so that all americans receive a tax reduction up to $200,000 or $250,000, it's -- of adjusted gross income, after all the deductions. >> and i suggest we need to accompany that analytical thinking and that sort of dive tend associated with the spending that would be done on a tax cut so we maximize the

benefit for the economy and we also have to think of the stewardship, the sound management that was part and parcel to the clinton years when we contrast that with the management post-clinton or preclinton. it is absolutely essential to incorporate concepts like pay-go, you pay as you go, you are forced then to come up with the ideas that will produce the revenues in order to initiate the new spending. >> by pay-go you mean that the congress and the senate, in enacting tax cuts, balance those tax cuts off against reductions of programs, or vice versa. if you have a new program where do you get the are ruff knew to pay for it. pay-go as applied to us in the congress. >> exactly. it create he is stewardship over the budget that doesn't find us in situations where we paid for two war, initiated a part d medicare doughnut hole

which impacted our senior population with the pharmaceutical needs and gave a tax cut to the wealthiest of americans and did it all off budget so that when this president assumes office, one of the first tasks assigned the administration,. braced by the administration, through truth in budgeting and honesty in budgeting is to bring online which grew the deficit, but it was a truthful budget. you can't continue to be offbudget to pay for programs. the pay-go concept requiring us to find revenue sources in order to do these orders of programming or tax cuts will be accompanied by the mindset, the logic of just how do you pay for it? pay-go means being fiscally responsible. >> excuse me for interrupting. that was the policy during the clinton period and it led to the surplus because it put

fiscal discipline into this building and also on the other side in the senate. similarly it's now been reinstituted by the democrats last -- a year and a half ago. i want to just wrap up here, i want to go back to the make it in america and wrap with this. our time has almost expired here this make it in america agenda, as speaker pelosi and soon toib minority leader pelosi said as she exited the organizational caucus of the democratic party today she said, there are two principles that the democratic caucus will follow, one, we will make it in america so that america can make it, and two, we will do this on behalf of the middle class so the jobs are there. interestingly, while the president hasn't used this term often of make it in america, he nonetheless has proposed -- president obama in this case, proposed policies that are directly in line with this. specifically that every business in america, every

business in america, be given the opportunity to immediately write off any capital investment that they make. now it's already in the law. in the american recovery and reinvestment act, there is in the law an automatic writeoff of a capital investment made by a small business. that would increase in a -- that was increased in a subsequent bill we voted out without any republican support that allows small businesses to write off immediately. the president would go further, i introduced a bill that would do that, other members of the democratic caucus will also so that businesses would be incentivized to invest now in the capital equipment that will provide the foundation for future jobs, invest now. this is part of our strategy, it's an overarching democratic stat ji, -- strategy, one we've been working on for some time beginning with the first bill passed by congress and -- among

the first bills passed by congress and signed by the president way back in 2009, the american recovery and reinvestment act. would you like to wrap us up here? mr. tonko: let me just sate, the -- state, the landmark small business act intended to create jobs allows for investment in exporting which i believe is critically important, investment in our modernization of manufacturing, and unleashing some $300 million worth of loan opportunities. we profess the small businesses to be the spring board to economic reare covery. we have made that our focus. but we came out of a deep, deep recession and unfortunately, there wasn't enough time for us

to feel the effects of the progress made by such legislation and i just think we need to pursue that progress. thank you very much, representative garamendi. mr. garamendi: we yield back our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time is expired. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the gentleman from missouri, mr. akin, is recognized for 60 minutes as designee of the minority leader. mr. akin: thank you, mr. speaker, good evening and i'd like to talk about several different topics today, one is on the hearts and minds of americans everywhere, i want to talk a little bit about unemployment, i want to talk about the economy, and one of the solutions to this problem.

this isn't very complicated but people try to make it more complicated than its needs to be. when we get done with that subject, i'll change subjects and do something nor topical for the thanksgiving season. i'll tell you a great adventure story about the pilgrims, the thanksgiving they celebrated and the many ways they helped our country. but first, let's talk about the problem of unemployment, the problem of the continuous and rapid growth of the federal government which stifles our freedom and liberty, buries us in red tape, and bureaucracy raises our cost of living and makes life more and more miserable for americans as they lose their freedoms and the out of control spending that accompanies that. these are problems we talked about, problems the vote verse voted on and the voters seem to think this is a problem.

in spite of the fact that we're going to try to shove socialized medicine down the throats of americans, in spite of the fact they don't want it, and we're not dealing with unemployment. we're not dealing with the causes for unemployment. i think we need to talk about it a little bit, it isn't as complicated as some of my colleagues seem to make it out to be, and it's not a matter of class warfare, has nothing to do with that. it's simple economics. now if you want to talk to anybody who is a small businessman and ask them, what are the things that kill jobs? ask them, what are job killers? i would bet you they'll be talking about things on this list right here. the first thing is, excessive taxation. the second, insufficient liquidity. what does that mean? it means it's hard for businessmen to get money from banks. economic uncertainty. people don't want to take risks when they don't know what's

going to happen next. and of course a whole lot of red tape and government mandates. all of those things are enemies to jobs and job creation. now, let's go into this just a little bit. this isn't so difficult. it's not a matter of class warfare, it's not a matter of are rich people not paying enough. in fact, here's an interesting statistic or two. what do you think the 1% of americans, what percent of the overall tax burden do they carry? what percent do you think the top 10% of americans? well the top 10% of americans carry about 70% of the tax burden in this country. how about the bottom 50% of americans? what percentage do they carry? less than 10%. so i guess we've got a pretty graduated income tax, that were the solution, we'd already be in great shape. but let's get back to the basics about jobs. first of all, why is it that

excessive taxation kills jobs? the reason is, because the people who own small businesses create most of the jobs. small business, maybe we should say medium to small businesses, that's salespeople with 500 or fewer employees. those are the businesses that hire 80% of americans. now, my democrat friends can't seem to make this connection. if you kill a business, you're not going to have the jobs. if you tax the businessman's hide off, he's not going to hire people because he doesn't have any money to buy new equipment, put up new buildings, invent new technologies and expand business. the connection is pretty straightforward. if you want to kill jobs you tax the guys that own those businesses. a lot of business owners don't really think othemselves as wealthy. they started some little business that's grown and grown

and grown and as it grows, they keep putting more and more money back in the business. they don't stop and consider the fact that they may be multibillionaires but they keep putting money in the business and the business grows and it hires more people. if you are so hung up on the fact that somebody is filthy rich and you're so hung up on the fact that they may be having more fun than you are and you've got to tax them into the dirt, you're not going to have any jobs. you can't have it both ways. if you want job, you have to have healthy businesses and you can't have healthy businesses if you tax them out of existence. excessive taxation is going to be a job killer. the insufficient liquidity if you run your banks and have bank regulators all over the banks they can't get money to invest in new things. economic uncertainty. let's say you own a business, you've got lots of money tied up in it. are you going to take a big gamble when you don't have any idea what next goofy policy the

administration is going to come up with? what kind of additional taxes and are red tape and bureaucracy you're going to face? no, you're going to hunker down and say, wait a minute, i'm not going to take any risks in this environment. businesses -- business is off, a lot of people are boarding up their businesses a lot of jobs being shipped overseas, we create a hostile environment for businesses, the big bys say, ok, you show us the rule, you don't want to have your jobs in this country, we'll take the jobs somewhere else. small businesses just close their doors. and the jobs are gone forever. so the economic uncertainty is a job killer. of course red tape, government mandates, there's one that should be in the list, excessive government spending, that's also something that historically has always been a problem. now, on top of the unemployment problem, on top of the runaway federal government that is no longer a servant but has taken

on the effects of the master and is bossing americans around and taxing them out of house and home and ruining the economy, if that's not bad enough, we've got another problem coming and it's something that we need to deal with in the near future and that's the problem of a huge tax increase that's just around the corner at the beginning of the year, so if we're already in trouble with close to 10% unemployment and we know that excessive taxation is one of the things that is a job killer, do we want to then apply a whole bunch more, another huge tax increase to the economy? most people would say you'd have to be crazy to do something like that. most people say, that's the dumbest thing in the world, to have a huge tax increase right when the economy is having a hard time. and yet that's precisely what is going to happen next year if the congress doesn't take action.

what's happening because of some rules in the senate, the bush tax cuts, a series of bush tax cuts, are going to expire. and when they do you're going to see some of the jumps here from 2010 to 2011. this ordinary income tax, the bracket of 35%'s going to jump to 39.6%. capital gains going from 15% to 20%. the capital gains, that's an important one because that's a place where people who invest in businesses have money, if this tax is low enough, they can put it back in the business. as you raise it up there's less money going back into businesses and these are different kind ofs of dividends, going from 15% to almost 40%, and the death tax, wow is that ever taking a jump. everybody knees -- needs to die. you need to die this year, that's for sure, because death tax this year is dearow -- zero. it's jumping to 55%. so when you get beyond the first

$1 million or $2 million that are protected from the death tax, what's happening is your dad owns a farm and he has a lot of fields and he's got a lot of pieces of equipment and your plan is to follow in your dad's footsteps and be a farmer. and your dad dies and you find out you're going to have to sell 55% of your farm to pay the taxes that your dad owes on his debt. isn't good enough to tax him when he's alive, they can tax him when he's dead. so we have a death tax. after you get done selling the fields and equipment, you say, i can't run the farm. that's really smart tax policy, isn't it? that we shutshuth down a small business -- shutown a small business by jumping the death tax from zero to 55%. we have a child tax credit here that are going up, marriage penalty, lowest tax brackets going from 10% to 15%. so these taxes are coming. now, most people would say,

they'd say, this is not what you should be doing during a recession. in fact, regardless if you're a republican or democrat, history says this is not what we should be doing. you could learn and i'm kind of surprised that the democrats haven't taken a lesson from kennedy. because he had a recession when he was president. he cut taxes and the economy sprung right back. and of course ronald reagan did it. i don't expect the democrats to learn from ronald reagan even though he used to be a democrat. but j.f.k., you'd think they could learn from him. you'd think maybe they could have learned from f.d.r. even. f.d.r. had a guy who was secretary of the treasury, henry morgenthau. henry morgenthau came up with the same idea that obama and company came up with a couple of years ago, that we're going to have -- we're going to stimulate the economy by spending tons of money. it's a little bit like grabbing your bootstraps and pulling and

hoping to fly around the room. they're going to spend money, spend enough money it will get the economy going. that's the idea. no normal rational person that's not been -- that's not smoken the funny cigarettes would come up with the idea. if your husband or wife said to you, hey, we got too much credit card debt here, i'm not making enough money, you know, things aren't going right economically, what do you think we should do? oh, let's spend money like mad. you'd think somebody was crazy. but that's what people have tried. henry morgenthau tried it. tried for eight years. he came and appeared before the house ways and means committee, his comment was that we have tried, these are actually his words, we have tried spending money, we're spending money more than we've ever spent before and it does not work. i say after eight years of the administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started and enormous debt to boot. now, i would hope that we could

learn something from history. this is f.d.r., this is world war ii, vintage-type stuff. we could learn from this. no. could have learned from bush, we could have learned from reagan. when you're in trouble like this, what you want to do is you want to back off on the taxes and back off on the federal spending. we're going the exact opposite direction. it doesn't make any sense to be raising taxes. we know that taxing small business is a job killer and yet we're forging ahead. trying to get everybody paying attention to the fact that, oh, the rich guys' got too many cigars or too many cars or something like that. but the trouble is, the rich guy who owns that company is the one who's hiring people. he's making the decision to add a wing on the building, put a new machine tool under the wing, to invest money in new processes, to come up with a better way to do things, to be more competitive than a foreign exetter and put americans back to work -- competitor and put americans back to work. those are the kinds of people you need to have taking the

money and plowing it back into the economy. there's some people who think through this idea of federal government spending money that you can put people to work by the federal government hiring them. that seems on the surface like a bright enough idea. certainly if you take some tax money and you go out and hire some people, those people have a job. doesn't that put people back to work? well, yes, and no. the people you hire do get a job. the trouble is for every one you hire there are two people in the private sector that lose their job because the government's sucking that money from those salaries out of the private sector. the private sector then becomes less efficient and economists will say that you lose about two jobs out of the private sector for everybody you put on the government payroll. if putting people in the government payroll worked, we'd all work for the government. they tried that in the soviet union. it wasn't such a hot idea. so, what's the danger? why am i talking about this stuff? it should be a day when politics is over, the elections are over,

we can get back to work and do the right thing. well, the right thing here is paying attention to the fact that america is in trouble with a 10% unemployment rate. it's actually more than that because i don't know if you know it or not but anybody who's been unemployed for a certain period of time they don't count them anymore. so they're not unemployment even though they don't have a job. that's sort of an interesting way to count, isn't it? but anyway, here's what happened a number of years ago. actually it was here in congress when this happened and these charts go back a few years. but i think it's kind of interesting. this is the gross domestic product, so these vertical lines are america's g.d.p. and this is before and after a tax relief which occurred in 2003, about the first or second quarter of 2003. and so the tax increase that we're talking about here is the

tax dish mean, the tax decrease we're talking about here is the very tax that's going to expire. so when we cut this tax in 2003, what happened to g.d.p.? here's g.d.p. going along like this. we do the tax cut and take a look at what happens to g.d.p. afterwards. that suggests that if there's any causele relationship at all that the tax cuts gave us a better g.d.p. let's take a look at the same tax cut not applied to gross domestic product but let's take a look at it, applied to jobs. these lines are job creation, the ones that go down mean that we're losing jobs. the ones that go up mean that we're creating jobs. this is what the economy is doing. now, this again is this may, 2003, when these tax relief measures went into effect.

look at all the jobs we're losing here and look at the snappy turnaround right here when you let the small business men keep some of what he earns. my goodness, what a turn around. now, here's a very unpleasant thought. if these tax cuts had this positive effect when the tax cuts went into effect on jobs and on gross domestic product, if these tax cuts had that positive effect, what happens when we reverse that same thing? what happen when is we turn it upside down? what happens when the tax cuts expire? are they not likely to exert the exact opposite force on our gross domestic product, on our already high unemployment? do we want to take -- now, we're not in this situation. right now we're having trouble with unemployment. but why do we want to put a

force on it that's going make it even worse? if these things did some good when they went into effect, why do we want to let them expire? it's bad enough the way it is. if we leave them the way they are now, extend the tax cuts, it may not fix the 10%, but it may not go to 15% anyway. and so this is what happened when the tax cuts went into effect to job creation. and that's why the economy took off. now, one of the things that it seems to me that my dear socialist friends don't quite understand and that is, if you're a happy socialist, what you want is you want the government to be doing well. you want to have lots of money that you can spend on different programs. of course we've been doing that too much, spending more than we have. but you'd think you'd want a strong economy because what a lot of people don't realize is, if that economy isn't strong, not only are individuals hurting, not only are states that have to balance their budgets hurting economically, the federal government revenues

are also way down. i was surprised during this time period when people wanted to say that the tax cuts had cost us a whole lot of money, that when you took the money they claimed the tax cuts cost in lost taxes and added it to the war in iraq and afghanistan, that the amount of money total was less than what it cost us to have the economy in the tank in these first couple of years. so when the economy is bad in your home, it's bad in your state. it also is lousy in the federal government. so you put all these tax cuts in place, you think, oh, that's fiscally irresponsible because then the government's going to go into debt more and more. oh, is that really so? in fact it's not so. let's take a look at what happened. here's federal revenues. this is the year, that's the tax cut. so federal revenues are coming down here. we cut taxes and the federal revenues actually go up. now that seems like making water

run uphill. why is it possible that the federal government would get more money when we reduce taxes? it's known to some people as the laugher curve. but what this is is it's the effect that when the economy gets going we collect more tax revenues. let's look at it this way. let's say that you're made king for the day or king for the year and your job is to collect as much revenue as you can collect in the selling of loaves of bread. and so you start to think, you say to yourself, well, i could put a one penny tax on a loaf of bread and people would eat a whole lot of bread because i'm not taking -- taxing it very much and we'd raise a certain amount of money. but if i could do that with a penny, i could move that over and charge $1 a loaf of bread. and get much more money. how about $10 a loaf? well, you say, well, wait a minute, $10 a loaf, i'd get $10 every time but people wouldn't buy bread anymore.

it would be too expensive. and so commonsense would tell -- common sense would tell you that if you're king for the year and you're taxing bread that there's some point between a penny and $10 perhaps, there's some point where there's an optimum amount of tax, where people will still pay it and still buy bread. and if you raise the tax what in fact happens is the revenue that the government collects goes down rather than up. in other words, it's not possible to just keep taxing too much because if you do it basically drives the amount of money you collect down. so there's an optimum point. and my point here is that if you're a happy socialist, you want the economy strong and the way to do it is to let the people that run the businesses have a enough money to make those investments so that the economy is strong and we have more federal revenue coming in. this is what happened 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007. the federal revenues start going up even though we did these tax cuts. now what we want to do is to reverse this. we're going to get rid of the tax cuts, which is then going to

have more affect to drive the economy down, it's going to create more job loss and it's going to make the g.d.p. worse. we are having trouble learning some very basic lessons from history, that we're at a point where we are overtaxing the economy and if we want to get this economy going, we have to learn from j.f.k., we have to learn from ronald reagan, we have to learn from bush, too, that the way to deal with this thing is to cut government spending and to cut taxes. it's a very straightforward answer. but we also have to realize that if we don't deal, if we don't deal with this tax cut, the tax increase that's coming up, we're going to add significantly to the already existing economic problems of our country. so what's the solution? it's not complicated. make the bush tax cuts permanent. now we republicans have proposed

that for years. the senate democrats have opposed it. the democrats in the house have opposed it. they say all of these tax cuts are for rich people and they talk about the classes of society in america and the one thing they can't seem to remember is the fact that if you don't have a strong business you're not going to have jobs and you're just going to have to get used to it. in america some people get stinking rich and is ok and it's all right for them to have their money because a lot of times they get enough money, they start spending it on other people anyway. start spending it. you have to let those businesses have money to work with, because the government isn't going to create the jobs and by letting the tax cuts expire, will damage the economy and increase the suffering of americans all across this country. the solution is straightforward at least to what we should be doing with these tax cuts and --

what we should be doing is keeping the tax cuts and voting to make them permanent and not letting them all expire. that is the commonsense way to approach the thing. it's not going to necessarily get us out of all the problems we are in right now, but prevent them from getting a lot worse. but what we have to do is to get back into the business of cutting back on federal spending and we have to cut back on government red tape and cut back on the different departments that we don't need to be paying for. we have to look at the central federal government and what does it have to do and it would be nice, we have to stop doing that. we aren't going to get out of waste, fraud and abuse and we will have to reform the system. .

we have heard the mess iege and we understand. we heard the message and we can do that. but there is one thing we can do. and that is in the house, we can change the rules. we can change the system. the house, democrat and republican leadership through many, many years, a series of different committees gain lots of power. if we look at that system and design a system which is not so much designed to spend money but to make it hard to spend money, then we can start making some progress and develop the tools here in the house to try to

reduce a government that is literally a runaway government that is no longer the servant of the people, but is increasingly becoming a fearful master. . let's take a look at how earmarks who spends the money and who makes the decision and how do we hold the committees accountable for reducing the size of the federal government. all of these things are ahead of us, but we need to stop this train wreck comenting and make the tax cuts permanent. that's the quick answer to something we need to be doing. .

>> a story of tremendous courage, tremendous vision who took great risks and gamble and blessed you and i and all true americans, blessed in ways that we have forgotten and ways that we need to remember. i'm going to grab a picture here --. i'd like to talk to you about this group of pilgrims that came over and gave us -- gave us our

thanksgiving, a particularly famous thanksgivinging that took place in plymouth, massachusetts. there was an earlier thanksgiving in virginia. this particular group of pilgrims, though, gave us a lot more than thanksgiving. so while it is the thanksgiving season, i think it's appropriate to think a little bit about their great example to us because it is the principles and ideas of people like this that we need to reproduce and follow their example as we move america forward in the days ahead. so let me start by saying, first of all, who were these pilgrims that we talk about? that were in plymouth? and that gave us thanksgiving? whorpt pilgrims? -- who were the pilgrims? they were a couple of groups of people but about half of them and some of the very influential ones were called separatists. they were what you might call in their day sort of the christian types of england except that they were a little bit of a weird subset.

in this regard. they had listened to the writing of a scottish theologian that followed knox and he started finding in his bible this interesting idea that the bible, particularly the old testament, or for jewish people, ther toa, there seemed to be a distinction between -- torah, there seemed to be a distinction between civil government and church government. that may seem obvious to us today but in those days if you recall there was a king half the time running the church and the church half the time running the kingdoms and the two were very much interconnected and intermixed, dating back to the time. but they came back with -- they came up with this idea that the bible seemed to indicate that there was a difference between church government and civil government and they got that from looking at the story about moses but moses was like the civil authority but he a cousin or a brother who was running the worship service.

aaron. and so there was that example but there were other examples that were less known. there was a guy who was a king and he went into the temple and started burning incense and -- because he thought he was able to do anything he wanted and a couple of courageous priests stood up to confront him and he started to stick his finger at them and give them a lecture and say, off with their heads and he looked and his hand was covered with leprosy. so there were these stories, particularly the story of saul, the first king, where he offered the sacrifice and samuel read him the riot act and said, you've really blown it now, buddy. so you have these examples in the old testament where civil and church government were separate. so these guys, the separatists, had learned from their scripture and this decided -- and had decided in their day that they didn't want their church to be run by the king of england. this was following old henry viii who had separated the english church from the church

in rome and so the church was being run by the king of england. and these guys decided what they were going to do in england, they decided that they'd get this manner house, they -- manor house, they'd all get together and worship and start their church and the church wasn't under the king, it wasn't under the king's thumb. well, as you can imagine, that did not meet with the approval of the king and he said, i'm going to harry them out of england. and so these separatists were given all kinds of very tough treatment, fines and taxes, their wives were put in the stocks and made fun of and all kinds of difficult things. so that these separatists couldn't really live in he canland and they couldn't have their -- live in england and they couldn't have their church. and so as you know the story, they moved to holland where they could have freedom to start their own church. and so they lived in holland for some time. it was a difficult existence them. to work seven-hour days and many, many hours dish mean, seven days a week and many, many

hours a day. very, very difficult economically for them. but they didn't complain and they were able to have their church worship service the way they wanted. and that lasted for some period of time as these separatists were in holland. but a couple things happened that convinced them to look around at something else and the main thing was that their children were picking up some bad habits from the dutch kids. and they didn't like that. they had come there because they had some very strong theological beliefs about what was right and wrong. they were worried about their children in the culture in which they were living and so they cast about for what god would have them do. and so the picture that is printed, it's a wonderful painting, it's about 10 by 20 feet in the rotunda. this picture depicts the key turning point for a bunch of these separatists and this is in the town of holland.

you can't see it here but it says speedwell. that's the name of the ship. these are the separatists gathering together in a farewell to their pastor who they loved dealer. he was a very even tempered, peace-loving mannest. had almost risked his life nam of times trying to separate groups of different christians that were fighting each other and he had his parisheners said he the wisdom too to see trouble coming and to steer his little flock away from the trouble. so they loved john robinson. he is now preaching his last sermon because he will not go with the pilgrims to america but instead will stay behind with the members of his church that were still going to be back in holland. and so as you can manl, if this is your last time and you have all of these friends who were going on this absolutely incredible expedition to plant a

plantation in the middle of the wilderness, all the way acrot -- all the way across the ocean, you're going to give them your best shot and talk to them about the things you think are most important in this picture here, we have a recording of -- not in the picture but we have a recording of what he was preaching about. first of all he bewailed the state of thecal vannists and the lutherans. he said, for those luther and calvin were bright lights in their own day, yet were they living today they would readily embrace the additional truth that god is breaking forth from his word. what they were -- what he was saying in effect was that our understanding that we get from the bible is not static. it's something that moves over time. and as people learn lessons from history we should learn from them and we should continue to learn the additional things that god is going to teach us in practical sense from his bible. in sense, his idea, the bible

was, it was a gold mine. it was full of truth. as men over time read it and understood it, they could imove the lot of civilizations. it turns out that this was a pretty good theory in all practical sense, whether you happen to have any interest in theology or not, it turned out to be a pretty good theory and you'll see why in just a few minutes as we follow this little group of people on this incredible adventure story. you have to think about this when people camto america in jamestown and other places it was men. they came here to some degree to say they were going to spread the light of christ to the heathens, but mostly they were looking for gold. that's what the history books show us. but this little group of people were different. they were going to take their wives and their children on a one-way trip across the north atlantic to try to plant a civilization and they were doing it not as a bunch of dogs that had their tails tucked between their legs because they'd been

chased out of one place and another place, but with a vibrant vision of a challenge to build a new civilization based on new principles and new ideas. they wanted a change from the european civilization because he said, this is robinson, goes on and says, now, when you go to this new land, be very careful what you adopt as truth, says he, for it is unlikely essentially that a christian civilization can spring so rapidly out of such thick antichristian darkness. he was talking about europe and how europe was very resistant to ideas that the bible would suggest were a good way to do things. so he was saying, now, when you go over on this great expedition, be really careful what you do because how you set things up is going to be very, very important and you don't want to set it up just the way they did in europe but continue to use the bible as the blueprint. and so these group of people are going to leave here and they're

going to go across and rendezvous in england with the ship mayflower. it turns out this speedwell was a leaky bucket and they tried to take a couple of attempts to start from england to go over to america and the seams on the speedwell opened up and it started to leak so badly they had to turn around and come back and then they had to take some of the different passengerses off and some of their supplies off, they had to leave the speedwell behind. it got to be kind of complicated and expensive. eventually like a family getting off on a vacation late, they eventually get in the mayflower, everybody they could fit in there, with what supplies they could and started across the north atlantic. well, that delay put them in the north atlantic in the fall which is a rough time to be crossing the north atlantic. well, the old mayflower started getting beaten by storms.

in the beginning the pilgrims, and maybe clarify this point now, the people in the mayflower at this point are two groups. about half of them are these separatists which you see here and the other half were just jolly old blokes off the street of england that were part of the merchant adventures financing this trip to plant a colony over in the new world. were starting a colony. they were going to make money for the people that were financing this undertaking and hoping to get rich. you have a little over 100 people, about 50-50 between the separateists who have a vision and the other people are there mostly hoping to get a good living and turn a page. and they are all seasick and

pretty miserable to be seasick and you want to die. so they would call them puke socks because everybody was sick and feeling pretty bad. but the storms intensified and the pilgrims noticed that the sailors weren't joking about it and the storms got severe. and in spite of their prayers, the mayflower was beaten by storms. they heard a crack as though they had run into a crack and one of those oak beams that was supporting the beams that started to sag under the weight and tremendous pressure of the wind, rigging and the sails and they were thinking to turn around and go back to england.

they continued to go across the ocean and because of the storms were blown significantly off course and landed the first time out in massachusetts, which is not virginia. they were headed to virginia. they were headed much farther south. so there they are after a couple of attempts to try to come south . the winds are unfavorable and the storms are rough and these riggers, the may flower, think were no great technological wonder and they didn't want to get hit with a hard wind to be driven on the sand iy beach. they are anchored out in provincetown and getting chilly

in massachusetts and they realize they an't in virginia and so their charter didn't apply and we are getting the first lesson from the pilgrims and what a great lesson it is for us today. and because the charter didn't apply, the two groups were known as the saints and the strangers. the saints were the separateists. and the strangers were the ones strangers to god and the strangers were saying, it's like australia, no rules. everybody for himself, we get to shore and do whatever we want to do and it had a smell of anarchy and the saints said we need to pull things together and so they kers exercised some leadership and took a piece of paper and wrote the mayflower compact. we don't have a copy of it. we have copies but don't have

the original. it wasn't an astounding thing but we considered it of great import. so it starts, in the name of god, amen and it goes on to say, we coulds together in a body politic. the frame such just and equal laws that may seem good. and so what is it that is so special about this mayflower compact. it's the first time in human history where you have a group of free people under god creating a single government to be their servant. does that sound like a familiar pattern? it is very similar to what our declaration of independence is saying. you have to understand in the context of history what they had done. in europe, the model of civil

government is the divine of kings. when i say jump, you are supposed to say how high. europe had been dominated by the divine right of kings. they were the boss. combod put them there and they tell you what to do. that's how europe did things. but these people when they came across the ocean had the concept that we are trying to infuse in the republican party as we debate about changing the system. they were going to change the system from the divine right of kings to the system where the government would be the severe vant of the people and that individual citizens had god-given rights and protect your rights. that's what the mayflower compact was all about. and that's why this very first

moment as they are at the great big oak table, why this moment is so significant to all of us because the pilgrims gave us the model of american civil government. to them, it was a straightforward idea, because they had struggled with this question in the context of their church government. in england, they decided to separate themselves from king james. he was a weird fellow and had strange social habits and didn't want him running their church. free people under god had created a new testament church. and they took that model of the new church and picked it up and applied it to civil government, a group of free people under god created a civil government, not a church government, to be their

servant. they believed the two were separate. they didn't tangle up the church with their civil government. the mayflower compact is really the first written constitution pulling these elements together that under god, free people are creating a single government. it's called the could have in the event tall view of civil government. and first written constitution in america and that is on the same pattern. that was 1620. i will continue the story of the pilgrims but just to jump forward, not long after that, 1620 to 1634, an advanced constitution, called the federal orders of connecticut, 1638, very early and the fundamental orders of connecticut has basically the whole model for the u.s. constitution, federal

ism, separate benches of government, a lot of the sophistication of the u.s. constitution, 18 years just after these pilgrims started with the mayflower compact. and well, i told you this group of pill grims had blessed us. it should be obvious. these are ideas that just completely undergirard america. separating civil government from church government. that's something they took from the bible. and they gave us our model of civil government which is the fact that the groft is to be the servant and not -- and those were pretty good ideas. they also came and this is a pretty important concept, they came with the belief they could learn things from the bible and use the bible as a blueprint to guide how they did things. and that same concept was picked

up by the people who had followed after, the pilgrims. let's finish the story a little bit and get to thanksgiving. the pilgrims are on provincetown on the tip of cape cod and do the mayflower compact and there was a blueprint in their holes. there was a sail and a rudder and they took it on the inside of cape cod and had their first encounter at eastham and just about sunrise and indians shouting at them and wasn't a warm welcome and shot their muzzle loaders. they were looking for a place in cape cod -- i had a chance to go

there and known as barnstable harbor. that is barn stable harbor and out in the suffer. and it got to be dark and the wind is coming up and starting to snow and trying to make a run into where they thought the entrance to barnstable was. it was a sandy beach and the surf was coming in. and the guy by the name of clark grabs the oar and heays if he be men, pull for your lives and laid into the oars and snatched it out of the waves and again the snow, it's dark and ice is freezing on their clothes and

eventually they managed to find something where they could pull into the lee of this piece of land where they got out of the heavy, blowing wind and pulled their boat up and spent a sunday on this island. when they got up in the morning it was an island in the middle of the harbor which was preliminary outh, massachusetts. and it was named after clark. they start making rapid discovery and there i land they can plant crops and a high area where they can defend themselves from whatever problems they might be. they were concerned about the indians. they didn't see indians but worried there might be some, but there was a reason they weren't

friendly. ships had come by and stole some of them and put them into slavery and put them in a bad mood. you have the pilgrims late in the season. in fact, about christmas day starting to build their first shelters in plymouth and as you can imagine, their supplies were limited and the people getting in and out of the wet boats and trying to build shetters there started to get sick and over a period of the next couple of months, more and more died and as many as four pilgrims at a time would die. there was a time, day or two, when everybody was so sick, only two or three were able to get up and feed everybody else and show themselves on the for the fix they made just in case the indians made an attack.

in the middle of the night, a man would take his dead wife and bury her under leaves and rocks and it was very tough. there were children, wives and adults and by the time march came around, half of the pilgrims, almost half of the pilgrims had died. you might ask yourselves, these are people that came with a vision. they had a vision that god was calling them to find a new nation based on principles, new ideasideas they took from the bible. and you would say where was their god, he blew them off course and now half of them died, you think they plight get discouraged. it is very easy to be discouraged. very few families who didn't have members that died. the captain had anchored the mayflower, in the spring decided

he lost half his crew and decided to sail back to england. he prevailed on the pilgrims and said you need to come back with me because this adventure hasn't worked. you can picture standing in the shore in plymouth and the wind is blowing through the pine trees and you are looking across the harbor and the boson is giving the call. sails are being squared to the wind, sailors being raised, men are walking or actually turning a bit crank. it was a different type of arrangement to lift the seaweed covered line that held the anchor. and first large and small, the may flower deleaps over the horizon and sound of the wind in the trees. and everyone of the pilgrims stayed there on that beach

because they believed that god had called them to a mission, beginning of something that was going to be great that he would bless, in spite of the fact that half had died. it wasn't too long after that they had their first indian sighting. they look out and here is this will tall brave walking down the street and he looks at them and in perfect english says, do you have any beer? quite a reception from their first indian guest. turned out he was an indian that was a chief of a tribe up in maine and liked hitch hiking down the coast and he could speak english and he developed a taste for smoked duck and beer and things. after he had had a good meal he told them about the indians in the parks. he told them about the fact that

the land where they were living had been considered cursed by the indians because the indians that had lived there had died of a plague. and so god and his providence took the pilgrims to probably one of the only places on the eastern seaboard where they could stay where there weren't hostile indians. it turned out that they made a good alliance with a good indian chief and had become a friend of the pilgrims and he talked to them about the last of the other indians that was living by himself alone and lonely. and when they understood the plight of the english settlers in plymouth, he decided to join them because he knew something about it. he had been shanghaied, sold into slavery, bought out of slavery by some monks, traveled to england, learned to speak english and had got an trip back in a ship to go back. he got there and the tribe was wiped out, i assume by smallpox or something.

so he's living by himself. now he joins the pilgrims that helped them and teaches them all kinds of useful lessons. he told them that in a short period of time that the streams would be full of little fish. they could use that to plant corn. he taught them important things like taking your mock sins off and wiggling your toes in the mud so you could catch he'lls which they could fry up for food. all sorts of useful things he taught them. and of course we know him as squantow. friend of the white man. and squanto lived with them for some time and helped the settlers there. they were living under the conditions of the contract that the merchant adventurers had set up and one of the things they had set up was that it was going to be a socialistic society. everybody was going to pitch into the common stores. they had common land, they were going to grow food on the land, everybody had to work the fields, everybody had to wash everybody else's laundry. and that wasn't working too well. in fact, governor bradford, he

was elected governor soon after governor carver had died of probably cerebral hemorrhage, governor bradford said in his diary of plymouth plantation, as though men were wiser than god, he said, you know this idea of socialism, he didn't use the word socialism, taking thevering common, putting it in common store, may have been a good idea to ancients as though they were wiser than god but he basically pitched out socialism and said every man could have his own field, grow his own corn and it said -- his diary said it made hands very indust rouse. people who would feign to be sick or too weak to work were growing corn for their family. so anyway they got rid of socialism and eventually after about a year or so, decided to celebrate a day of thanksgiving and so they invited a couple of indian chiefs to join them for

thanksgiving. the trouble was the indian chiefs brought alo about 90 braves and so when the pilgrims saw this massive number of indians, they were going to feed for a meal, they're thinking, oh, my goodness this isn't going to work very well. but fortunately the indians did some hunting. they brought dear and turkey and a number of other things, berries they had collected. they had a wonderful thanksgiving. the indians stayed three days and enjoyed thanksgiving over and over again and in the meantime they had foot races and contests and shooting with bows and arrows and all kinds of other things that they did that was a lot of fun. it was a gath great couple-day celebration of thanksgiving in plymouth plantation. thanksgiving became a very popular holiday in the colonies, up and down the eastern seaboard. and of course the first national day of thanksgiving was called by george washington to celebrate the adoption of the

u.s. constitution. it was later set at a particular time in november and i think it was the third thursday in november as i recall and it has stayed there to this time. so we have the story now of the pilgrims and as you celebrate your thanksgiving this year, it might be helpful to think back and say, there's more than thanksgiving with the pilgrims. there were a groom of people -- group of people who were willing to change the system, to think of different ideas. they came here and separated civil and church government. they came here and created the model of a written constitution, the idea that the government is to be the servant of the people and that people have god-given rights and it's the job of the government to protect those rights as we have stated another 150 years later in our declaration of independence. they came here with the idea that after trying socialism that it wasn't going to work. they realized that it was unbiblical, it was a form of

theft and so they pitched socialism out. they learned that and -- in the early 1620's. so we can thank these people because of the fact that they were innovative and had that spirit and desire, even when half of them died and the mayflower was going back. they clung to their vision they had the courage to create a new civilization. and the words that bradford prints in his diary says that, they felt that perhapshey lit a candle on dark shore and they felt that perhaps that they could be a stepping stone for people who would come after them to found a great nation. and so the dream that they had to come here and do something new, unlike what europe had done, that dream was very much in their hearts, very much part of their thinking as they scratched that existence on that lonely rock-strewn massachusetts

shoreline. and to this day as we celebrate thanksgiving we can remember their first thanksgiving when they put a few colonels -- kernels of corn on a plate to remind them of how close to starving to death they had been at one time. so it's a beautiful story. there's a lot more to it. a lot more adventure to it. there was knife fights and cabins, i haven't had time to cover that all with you. but the basics are there. this is a great bunch of americans, a wonderful adventure story and a time for us to give consideration to the fact that we also have been given a challenge, a challenge of a beautiful land that was established on a firm foundation. it's our job to keep it that way and pass it on to our children. a government that is the servant of the people and not the master. god bless you all. have a wonderful thanksgiving. and, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time.

under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. kirk, for 60 minutes. mr. kirk: mr. speaker, 10 years ago i had the great privilege and honor to deliver my first speech as a representative of the people of the 10th district of illinois. as i end my time in the house of representatives and begin with the honor of serving the great state of illinois, i want to thank those that i have served with and reflect on my time in this great body. our jefferson's manual of house rules traces its heritage back to the palace of westminster in london, england. early in the 1980's i worked under a member of the house of common sense. during the time of prime minister margaret thatcher. and in a parliament great in its

weight, puts everything on a member's maiden speech. in the speech that i gave in the house of representatives, a new member outlined the principles for which he stands for. and as i begin my service, as i began my service to the people of northern illinois i highlighted the political tradition of the men and women who represented us in this house. a look at their accomplishments and service mirrors who we are and the gifts that we can provide to this great nation. our community has a 180-year-long tradition of electing leaders who were very independent and ahead of their time. ours is a rich tradition and i can only hope that history will find my contributions to be consistent with the predecessors whose roots trace back to 1818, when a new state of illinois

stood on the frontier of a growing nation. my predecessors were committed to the people of illinois and the good of this union. at the same time they understood the important role of the united states and the world as a beacon of freedom and while they fought for civil rights here at home, they also fought for human rights abroad. and condemned those who would spread intolerance and hate wherever it occurred. within its current boundaries, our congressional district encompasses a diverse community, including northern cook and eastern lake counties and spretches from willemette to waukegan. to tour our district is to see firsthand the promise of the american dream and those who have not yet realized it. our residents enjoy both great benefits and serious challenges. we are home to some of the wealthiest communities in the nation and yet we also have some of the most economically challenged communities in

illinois. we have pristine wetlands and forest as well as one of the worst pluthed harbors in the great lakes and more than 1,000 tons of highly radioactive spent nuclear fuel stored just 120 yards from lake michigan. we are also home to the only training center for new recruits to the united states navy. and each day thousands of my constituents commute to chicago, fighting some of the worst trafc congestion in the nation and each morning into the city and repeating the process every evening. and serving the people of the 10th district, i have been honored to follow a long list of role models who represented us in the congress. our first representative, john mcclain, was one of the state's pioneer political leaders. he took his seat in the old house jail em-- chamber december 3, 1818, serving just one year. he was later elected to the united states senate to fill a vacancy caused by the death of

senator edwards in 1824 and served through march of the following year. while our pathfinder's service was very brief in both chambers of this congress, he was honored by the state which names mcclain county after him. and it was about this time that the first european family settled on the north shore in what is now evanston, residing in a place that was described as, quote, a rude habitation of post, poles and blankets. more notable, though, was the construction of the first permanent structure on the north shore. a roadside grocery serving cold beer and i will core to travelers. the grocery -- liquor to travelers. the grocery was described as, quote, the headquarters to counterfeiters, fugitives of justice and a vial resort. ironically 100 years later evanston would become the international headquarters of the women's christian temperance

union and from these spartan but colorful beginnings we trace our suburban history. numerous ships and population brought many changes to the boundary lines of today's 10th congressional district and redistricting changed its landscape no fewer than 10 times in the last 190 years. we face another change soon as illinois prepares to lose a congressional seat in the next election. by 1902 lake and north cook counties were part of the 10th district and the first outlines of our current district were formed as a new phenomenon of american living emerged. the suburbs. in 1913 the election of a progressive candidate, charles m. thompson, was indicative of the new independent spirit of the 10th district voters. and our willingness toa elect whomever will best represent our interests, regardless of income

been asy or party affiliation. independent thoughtful leadership are common theems among the men and women who represented our 10th district. our leaders include jon stewart, a law partner of president lincoln. james wood worth, isaac arnold, lorenzo, george faust, george adams, a civil war veteran who fought in the first regiment of the illinois volunteer artillery and robert mccolory who served for nearly 20 years and was the house manager for the eco-- equal rights amendment in 1972. but there are five men and women who represented the 10th district who stand out among this impressive crowd. and deserve star treatment. these five heroes fought against slavery, advocated equal pay for women and civil rights initiatives and served a number of presidents as they battled

for human rights abroad while funding biomedical research here at home. these five exempified the high standard of leadership demanded by our constituents and expected by our nation. elected in the 33rd congress as a wig, representative washburn served his final seven terms as a republican. a republican. during congress, he served as chairman on the committee on commerce and in the 40th congress as chairman of the committee on appropriations. in 1862, president lincoln personally lobbied to have him elected speaker but fell short. representative washburn's legacy is legendary, a strong nopet of slavery and became known as a leader of the radical

republicans. this group was outspoken in its opposition to slavery that wept beyond beyond calling simple and litigation. they called for equality under the law, the radical republicans were critical of the policies of president lincoln and president johnson. representative argued that southern plantations should be subdivided and redistributed amongormeslaves and when president johnson attempted to veto the extension of the freeman's bureau, the civil rights act and reconstruction act, representative washburn and his colleagues took action and were successful to pass the reconstruction act. the radical republicans and washburn became leaders in the impeachment. representative washburn was appointed as our country's

secretary of state. he resigned just 11 days later, pending what remains the shortest term of any secretary of state. congressman washburn left the office because the president offered him the opportunity to assume the diplomatic mission in paris. he served as our ambassador to france and through the franco -prussian war. he offered foreigners who were abandoned by their plimentic mission. they found safety under the american flag with ambassador washburn and when the german army surrounded paris, he remained at his post and only foreign diplomat in paris during the days.

these were tough times for them. they were reduced to eating rats. washburn honored our war debts to france by continuing his humanitarian service. his international service and his commitment to humanitarian relief presaved our own time when america has become a foundation for freedom. the humanitarian relief missions around the world, the congressman remained in paris until 1877 when he returned to chicago. 60 years later, we come to the beginning of a career of another star in our story, congressman ralph church, who won election to congress in the 74th, 75th and 76th congress and 78th congress and his death in the 80th congress. many remember congressman church and his wife.

the second one in our story is a far ahead of her time. representative church's widow, she succeeded her late husband in the congress and during her first term, for the first time since 1901 had placed northern cook and lake counties in what was then called the 13th district. mrs. church brought a commonsense approach to federal spending. she spoke against reckless spending, earning respect from her colleagues and constituents. her seat on the government operations committee gave her a platform to urge restraint in spending and her assignment on the committee on foreign affairs allowed her to encourage the growth of dem department across the globe. many of her proposals were forward-thinking. early in her career, they advocated equal pay for women

and civil rights initiatives. the progress of the 1960's found its roots 10 years prior partially in the service of mrs. church. only female member in the illinois delegation, she answered 11,000 roll calls during her tenure in the house, missing only four. in 1959, as a ranking member of the foreign economic policy subcommittee, she traveled more than 40,000 miles and visited 17 countries. in 1960 at the invitation of president eisenhower she participated at the white house conference on children and youth and served as a member of the u.s. delegation to the united nations 15th assembly. while participate ins, she jumped far ahead of her time, especially in her outspoken public criticism of south africa and their policy of apartheid.

and retired in 1962. the 88th congress saw the beginning of another career, donald rumsfeld was elected representative for this district having previously served on the staff of two congressmen. he sat on the committee of government operations. it was during this president kennedy's space program and jim loveell went on apollo. and his campaign were indicative of what politics used to be and what they were to become. he accepted only small donations and limited expenditures for his campaign while relying on volunteers to go through neighborhoods and perform tasks

which served as the lifeblood. then and today for any strong congressional campaign. in 1969 reresigned to accept a place in president nixon's administration as the head of the office of economic opportunity. not knowing much of the mission, he turned to his chief of staff who had an intern friend who had written a college paper on the office of economic opportunity. that intern came to brief congressman rumsfeld and walked out with a job. the intern's name was richard cheney. president nixon appointed rumsfeld as the director of the cost of living council, a position he held until 1973 when he became the united states ambassador to nato. when president ford took office in 1974, he recalled rumsfeld to washington to coordinate a

transition team. his performance earned him appointment as the white house chief of staff although he did not like the title and preferred to be called staff coordinator. he brought secretary cheney with him. in 1975, rumsfeld was appointed our secretary of defense, a position he held through the end of the ford administration in 1977. he was awarded the presidential medal of freedom, that same year and during the reagan administration, rumsfeld's expertise accepted and became an advisor on national security affairs. he was named special presidential envoy to the middle east in 1984. rumsfeld's experience in the private sector as a c.e.o. and senior advisor to william blair

and company. i'm proud to call him a friend. building on the records, we touch on other stars of our story. congressman robert mccolory served as a true symbol of independence. he was a conservative and a loyal republican who was a defender of president nixon until the evidence convinced him otherwise. it was the congressman's vote for two impeachment articles that set the standard for political independence, judgment and the rule of law in this house. for us, we now come to the final predecessor of mine, john edward porter, who one a special election in 1980. to briefly touch on his service, it was brilliant in many ways and set another standard for

independence in this chamber and on the federal bench. following him, congressman porter gained a seat on the appropriations committee where he served until after his retirement. following a trip to the soviet union in 1983, congressman porter founded the congressional human rights caucus and witnessed human rights abuses while in the soviet union and enlisted the support of his colleagues to bring pressure on groups where they mistreat prisoners. in his role, he helped free prisoners and fight for the rights of refugees and spoke out against the use of child soldiers in africa and condemned the brutal regime of the dictator in nigeria. the human rights caucus was the first human rights entity to

host dal iowa llama. and he -- dal a llama and secured appropriations to fund this groundbreaking program helping to move the agenda. his record of accomplishments in foreign policy is impressive but his record was unmatched. he led efforts to improve the safety of the local airports by updating the radars and brought back the coast guard units, the same coast guard units that saved my life as a teenager. he worked with the u.s. army corps of engineers to control flooding and his commitment to the environment led him to be a strong supporter of the clean air act and clean water act. he designated 290 acres of land at a forth as open space and one of only six house members named as taxpayer superhero by the

grace commission citizens against government waste in 1992. named to the concord commission in for his commitment to eliminating deficits. john porter was willing to take chances when he believed in an issue in 15 years ago long before it was safe to do so. he performed the third rail of politics. his proposal can be considered revolutionary because it was one of the first and was similar to many proposals that followed. what congressman porter may be mow remembered for was his improvement of the health care for all americans. in his role as chairman of the subcommittee on health and labor services and education, congressman porter launched the effort to double funding for the national institutes of health within five years. this additional funding helped

research rs develop better treatment and helped fund the cracking of the human genome and research that will result in better health care. john porter served us all in the highest tradition of public service and commitment to a greater good. having served as his administrative assistant, i could not have had a stronger role model in public service. i had some very large shoes to fill and can only hope to be remembered by my constituents as someone who fulfilled his tradition. the record clearly demonstrates northeastern illinois' political character, strongly independent, generally ahead of our time, ideas like emancipation, equal pay for women and end to apartheid were part of our

representative leadership and decades ahead of the body politic. our opinions do not necessarily adhere to strict party lines and therefore, anyone who represents our area must demonstrate independence and break from the party on occasion to make sure that they are adhering to our values. my predecessors did this and while i'm a firm believer in my party's vision, it's that practice tigs of independence that i sought to serve in the house of representatives. washburn, church, rumsfeld, porter, they are not household names, but their service helped shape the history of our nation. because of their cmitment to do what was right and the decision to take action to protect those most in need, it is an example of what i strofe to live up to in the service of this house and the people of the

10th congressional district. drawing on this tradition, i focus my model pioneered about spending restraint modeled after mrs. church, biomedical research in the example of john porter, on national defense modeled after don rumsfeld and america's role in the world modeled after representative washburn. this should be a thoughtful independent leader at all times and the independence is the way to represent the people of illinois and i take that very seriously. i had the ability to follow that tradition. i co-sponsored and voted in favor of the campaign finance reform law. a bill opposed by most members of my party. although my support did not make me popular in leadership circles, i made a promise to my

constituents and i was not going to break it. this was not the time to follow party loyalty because i thought the nation's interests were in supporting that legislation. i have consistently co-sponsor and supported bipartisan legislation end to hate crimes and end employment discrimination, bolster access to women's health services and ensure equal rights for all americans. i've also been a staunch supporter of federal stem cell research. this cutting-edge research has the potential to eliminate pain and suffering for millions of people who are living with cancer, diabetes, alizymer's ard and more. such independence is reflected in congressional quarterly's analysis which identified my record for example in 2009 as the center of the house. my predecessor set our country on a course to double funding for the national institutes of health. over his first five years. aye and i maintain that

commitment to his legacy through 10 years in this house. on my view, it is essential that we continue this promise and ensure that we remain committed -- committed to the future advancement of medical technology and research. i'm also very proud to be one of the only few republicans who worked actively to craft stem cell legislation and was an original sponsor of h.r. 3, the stem cell research enhancement act, which the house passed but unfortunately was vetoed by the president. the future of stem cell research is unknown but i'm hopeful that we will continue to lead on this issue and ensure that we find a permanent solution and set a funding from the federal government. following the inauguration of president obama i worked with my fellow moderates in the tuesday group, the house centrist caucus, to create a health care reform agenda. as a result of hundreds of meetings and round table discussions, with providers and

doctors and patient groups, we authored the medical rights and reform act which guarantees the doctor-patient relationship. allows individuals to buy insurance across state lines and would end frivolous lawsuits. following congresswoman church's footsteps, i also took members -- measures to reduce wasteful federal spending. i bucked my party in leading the charge to deny hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding for the infamous bridge to nowhere in alaska. i was also the first member of the appropriations committee to swear off pork barrel spending in our broken earmark system. consistently voted to support the taxpayer and ease the burden of spending on the taxes of american families. i voted in a way that reflects the frag matic problem-solving nature for the people of northeastern illinois. i tried to make sure that the federal government was making daily life easier for suburban families. the most common complaint against families in chicago

suburbs is traffic congestion. our highway system is outdated and in need of repair. and mass transit needs may be more readily available if we work policy correctly. to address this, i join with my colleagues in the west, especially congresswoman bean, to create the suburban trrpgs commission. our goal was to bring together local leaders and their state and federal representatives to find solutions to local and regional trrpgs problems -- transportation problems. i've been a staunch supporter of commuter rail and since we've been in office, met are a has expanded service on its northcentral line and is working now to build the star line which i hope will provide a commuter rail link between western suburbs. i also introduced the commuter act to incentivize the use of public transportation. among suburbanites who would otherwise be struck in traffic. recognizing the continued growth of suburban communities, i joined with dozens of my colleagues to devise the

suburban agenda. a package of legislation designed to address the needs and concerns of suburban families. we focused on keeping kids safe in school. making college more affordable, preserving open space and improving our health care delivery system. and to keep employment up in the suburbs and the teeth of the great recession, introduced the small business bill of rights. bills to protect the number-one engine of our economy, small businesses. from preserving the right to a secret ballot in a union election to eliminating unnecessary paperwork, the small business bill of rights is a prime example of suburban pragmatism at work. suburban families also expect world class schools and in the 10th district we are privileged to have some of the best public schools in the country. i think it's fitting that the first bill i introduced in the house was the gread a act taupe sure full funding for federal impact aid schools.

i established an education advisory board that helped guide me in formulating education policy. and this board helped draft legislation making technical corrections to the no child left behind act that i believe would enhance local control of schools and empower teachers. i worked on many facets of improving our education system including creating healthier learning environments, introduced a green schools act to provide matching grants for green school construction projects in our classrooms and the school conservation core act to support conservation clubs and teach kids about the importance of environmental protection. as a staunch supporter of alternative energy and transportation, we supported and authored many other bills to provide permanent tax incentives for renewable energy and clean transportation. and also joined with congressman buller and platts to help lead the republican efforts to raise the nation's fuel economy

standards. following in the tradition of congressman washburn and porter who promoted human rights in remote corners of the world through my ten pour that this house, i took up the case a journalist imprisoned in bangladesh, simply on the crime of promoting interfaith dialogue between bangladesh and israel. he was charged with sedition, a crime punishable by death under bangladeshi law and spent 18 months in prison before congressional attention convinced authorities to release him. in 2007 the house passed a resolution i authored calling on the government of bangladesh to immediately drop all charges against him. it carried by a vote of 409-1. some of our work also helped secure the release of a doctor, a political prisoner in ethiopia. we condemned the persecution and

sought to bring peace to darfur. work to secure the release of the first egyptian blogger to be jailed for his online writings and established the congressional commission on divided families to reunite korean americans with their north korean relatives. we fought to protect iraq's christian community from increasing violence and led efforts to combat the rise of global anti-semitism. we fought for women's rights around the world, basic education, health services and access to family planning. we stood up for our allies, poland, armenia, greece, ukraine and georgia, and increased oversight of the united nations' relief and works agency and demanded accountability in u.s. assistance to the west bank and gaza. we successfully changed policy on proposed arms sales to saudi arabia, protecting u.s. forces in the region and preserving

israel's qualitative military advantage. we delivered eyes in the sky and the radar system to defend the state of israel. and in our bipartisan legislation, we moved it forward to probability gasoline sales to iran which is now the law of the land. in my time representing the people of the 10th district, there is one defining moment that shaped my work in the congress and forever changed our country. i started the day on september 11, 2001, in the pentagon, having breakfast with secretary rumsfeld. the meeting broke up early when the secretary was notified that a second plane hit the world trade center. shortly therefore we were evacuated from the capitol complex after the pentagon was hit. being forced from our offices that day was a profoundly sad moment. as a veteran and naval reserve intelligence officer, i knew we were at war and there was much

work to be done in the congress to protect the american people and provide our military with the resources they needed to fight terrorism. the house began debating legislation to establish a department of homeland security while most congressional offices were closed as a result of an thrax attack. working out of temp rare space at the general accounting office, -- temporary space at the general accounting office, i authorized language for 911 capabilities for telephones on passenger aircraft and trains. at the same time i also began working on improving the effectiveness of the state department's rewards for justice program, to help provide investigators with more information that could lead to the capture of wanted terrorists. remembering how a tip from this program led to the capture of a terrorist who murdered c.i.a. employees outside headquarters on january 25, 1993, i wanted to

increase the maximum reward for information that would lead us to terrorists responsible for 9/11. in the years that followed we continued to work to make this program more effective, authorizing special payments, expanding the number of informants eligible for rewards and allowing payments other than cash to be made in certain circumstances. the war in afghanistan requires crucials from all elements of the u.s. government and sometimes the best support comes from unexpected places. on one trip to afghanistan i was pleasantly surprised to find that some of the best intelligence against al qaeda and the taliban were coming from agents of the drug enforcement administration. i was also surprised to learn that the d.e.a. was not officially part of the u.s. intelligence community. i returned to washington and worked with congressman frank wolf to make sure that the d.e.a. became an official member of the intelligence community

again. i also washinged -- worked to provide d.e.a. with specialized intelligence aircraft to use in afghanistan. the intelligence collected from this plane not only helps war fighters on the ground, but the information is also admissible in court, meaning narco terrorists in afghanistan could more likely face criminal charges in the united states. i'm very proud of the work in congress to help our men and women in uniform fight overseas. and more proud to have served alongside them. in december of 2008 i became the first member of the house to serve in an eminent danger area when i deployed to kandahar, afghanistan, to serve as a special advisor to general nicholson for regional command south, focused on counternarcotics. a year later i returned to afghanistan to serve again. each time i'd become more committed to the men and women serving over there and their mission. today, nine years after the first american boots hit the ground in afghanistan, the

mission remains vital to our security. we must leave afghanistan only after victory is secured and terrorists no longer find sanctuary in its rugged mountains capable of hurting americans and the united states. as a veteran, one of my highest priority notice congress is to take care of our men and women in uniform. consistently work to improve the quality of life for active duty service men and women, their families and retirees. we're proud to have joined with congressman dennis moore to pass the american veterans disabled for life memorial coin act. this memorial will honor the sacrifices made by america's more than three million disabled veterans, by building a memorial for them here in washington d.c., within eye sight of the capitol. it's also inspired to see this bill passed by an extraordinary young man. sergeant brian anderson of rolling meadows, illinois. brian lost both legs and an arm

due to a roadside bomb in iraq. washington has legions of professional advocates who make a living out of convincing people to see issues from their point of view. but none can compare to brian. with brian, what you sigh is what you get. a veteran with an inspirational story who wants to see the memorial built not for himself, not just for disabled veterans, but so that everyone will remember the sacrifice of all of our veterans. one project in particular follows the arc of my career in this house. in 1999 a washington-based consultant wrote a study recommending the closure of the north chicago v.a. hospital. the study said that link county veterans could get help downtown in chicago or maywood or even the milwaukee area with only a 30-minute drive. the study overlooked the fact that north chicago v.a. was recently renovated and housed

modern in-patient wards with the latest equipment still in bubble wrap. it also overlooked the fact that the navy operang an outdated, oversized hospital no more than a mile away and had plans to invest more than $100 million to replace it. i thought it made more sense to combine these two institutions, rather than close one and rebuild the other. over the last 10 years, we battled the bureaucracy and gradually integrated the services of the navy and the v.a. services of the navy and v.a. and combined inpatient mental health leading to an operation suite and october 1 of this year we officially opened the first truly joint navy-v.a. hospital in the country. this new facility will care for more than 100,000 veterans, retirees, sailors and their families. it's my hope this model will improve health care throughout

our nation. what a better way to honor our veterans than by naming the facility after one of our heroes james a. lovell junior. i wrote to gordon england and requested that it have the name that reflect the mission of this pioneering hero. in response the deputy secretary wrote it is fitting to name the facility named after captain lovell for his role in the history making gem nye 7 mission which including the maneuver. the joint facility in north chicago can be described as the first rend day view as the treatment facility joining them into one comprehensive facility. it is a history-making event,

unquote. as i leave this house, we face key challenges, challenges of facing gridlock in our communities, challenges on the environmental front of cleaning up nuclear waste and pcb's and maintaining the tradition of the 10th district, challenges like keeping the u.s. health care system on the cutting edge so each american lives a full and healthy life and providing fairness for married people and ending the death tax and stopping government waste. i look forward to continuing our work and confronting these challenges head on in the senate. in the meantime, i want to extend my best wishes and heartfelt congratulations to our congressman-elect robert dole who will continue our tradition of thoughtful leadership.

he shares commitment for our state, country and democratic allies. the 10th district is now in good hands and look forward to working with him to advancing these goals. mr. speaker, i first arrived in this house as a staff member in 1984, 26 years ago. on and off, i served during the spepperships of tip, tom foley, dones hastert and nancy pelosi. this institution is the real arena of american politics. it is here that the raw emotions of the american people are translated nearly into draft needs. it is here where democracy is strongest, youngest and most

vibrant. as an intern, staffer and member , i have had the honor to serve in the house of commons in london, in the house of representatives in washington and soon in the senate. but most of my professional life in one form or another has been here in the people's house. i have loved every minute of it and would say to young americans that one of the best ways to make a real difference in the life is to join the roughly 12,000 americans who have had the unique privilege of serving their district here in the center of the democratic world. i want to especially thank my district chiefs of staff, my washington chiefs of staff doug, list ave and les and the man who drafted my first speech in the

house, patrick and the man who drafted my last speech in the house, patrick. i move now onto the senate to serve the people of illinois, honored to have the privilege to work for everyone from rockford to caro. but part of my heart will always remain here in the house with the spirit of washburn and church and rumsfeld and porter. the men and women who represented the northern suburbs here in the house of representatives. mr. speaker, i yield the floor for the last time and thank you. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman have a motion. mr. kirk: i move that we do now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn.

we have elected the leadership of the 112 congress. i want to recognize nancy pelosi, steny htye -- hoyer. this has come together on behalf of the american people. there were so uplifting in their encouragement of our pursuit in behalf of jobs and this economy and fighting on behalf of the american people. that is what brings us together and unifies us behind our great leader, nancy pelosi. >> thank you very much. i wish all of america could have seen our caucus today.

and yesterday, mr. chairman. the covenants that thehave for fighting for the middle-class, saving social security, honoring their men and women in uniform and building a future worthy of their sacrifice. we are going to speak briefly, each of us. i am proud to be a part of this leadership team. we will go out there and listen to the american people. it is about jobs and reducing the deficit and about fighting for the middle class. i look forward to doing that with this great leadership team. we have a new position -- he has been chosen to be the ranking member on the budget committee. many expected to be a statement of our nation built -- national value. i know that he will make that choice based on value, based on reducing the deficit.

i want to congratulate him on is the position. >> thank you very much. this was a difficult election to say the least. the american public reflected their anxiety and their desire that we stay focused on creating jobs, going our economy, and ensuring fiscal balance prolong term. we are committed to that objective. i talked about the agenda of make it in america. we ought to make sure that americans understand that they and their children can make it in america, but also that we can make it in america, manufacture it and grow it. so we grow good jobs for our people.

participateoing to as a minority in this congress. we will be ever vigilant to keep the republicans as they did to us to their rhetoric on fiscal balance and on growing jobs. that is what the american people have asked us to do. that is what we have been doing. that is why we have created a billion jobs this year alone in the private sector. we will continue to work with a focus on the agenda that we have listened to the american people and we will respond to their names and the needs of their families and the needs of their children for a better america and america that has a job for everyone who wants to work. thank you very much.

on behalf of making it america that all of us can be proud of. jim cliburn of south carolina. >> thank you very much. thank you so much for your friendship and leadership. thank you so much for what you have done it before this caucus. this is a tremendous leadership team. i want to thank all of you. you know, the last two days, our focus has been very introspective. i have enjoyed sitting down

yesterday for about 56 hours and listening to our members, listening to those who will not be with us next time. today, we went through a process that i think will lay a foundation for us to beat perspective as we go forward. i am looking forward to working with this team. we have bad these crossroads before. we know what it takes to get us back to where we need to be on behalf of the american people. we are going to do it with enthusiasm and i am looking forward to what lies ahead. i want to yield two are vice chair. eyes tear.

>> as i learned a long time ago from a friend in elected office, that was then, now is now. we have a job in front of us. we know it and we are ready to get back to work to continue to build on the successes of over 150,000 jobs created last month. building on the fact that we just got word that 14% more small businesses are operating -- offering health insurance to their employees as a result of the health care bill. we are ready to go to work. as a look at the landscape, working with this president, he knows this very well. i think it sounds even better in spanish. i would like to ask our ranking

member on the budget committee to say a few words. >> thank you. i want to thank the members of the democratic caucus for electing me to be the ranking member of the budget committee in the next congress. i think we all know that is going to be a central front and the great national debate we will have about the best way to kick our economy into high gear to make sure that we put more americans back to work. for the first time, our republican colleagues are going to share in the responsibility for trying to get the economy back on its feet. we of knowledge that people are still hurting and we have a long way to go. or we can find common ground and i hope we can find common ground, we will work together. where we have differences, we

will make our differences known. it is important that the whole nature in -- the whole nation engage in this debate as easy to get the economy and make sure that we put this country on a path of fiscal responsibility and fiscal discipline. i am looking forward to that great debate. i think the speaker and our leadership team. >> [inaudible] >> the message we received from the american people was that they wanted a job. they want jobs. 9/5% unemployment was a very tough screen to get there within the other message.

we want them to make it in america. manufacturing in our country so that their families can make it in america. this is an experienced diverse leadership team that is very strong. a team that took us to victory in 2005. in the meantime, i would say to the american people, we extend the hand of friendship to the republicans. we look forward to hearing their ideas on job creation and deficit reduction. i hearken back to my youth and was inspired by john f. kennedy. we must find the right way to go forward as we take our own responsibility for the future. now i have the chance to serve under a young inspiring president of the united states. we will all strive to work together in a bipartisan way.

i am very, very proud of our leadership team and proud of their role that he will serve as assistant leader. he is an icon in our country in terms of working for the middle class. how sad we are to lose a very distinguished member of congress to always put forth a budget that was a statement of our national values. >> over 60 house democrats lost in the cycle. why are you the best person to lead democrats in the current political landscape? >> how would your ratings be if $75 million for spent against you? because i am an effective leader and we got the job done, because

they know that i am the person that can attract to this source is to take us to victory because i have done it before. you take nine plan 5% unemployment -- nine play 5% unemployment. i would like to see what your ratings would be. i am still proud of our members. so many of them have said to me that they want to keep the door open to running again and to work with this leadership team. >> i urge you to speak with the overwhelming number of our membership who elected nancy pelosi to be our leader. i believe that she has led us and she has led us to historic heights.

minyas -- the person who could do that here in the house of representatives is the woman who is named nancy pelosi. they know her heart. >> the heartfelt feeling of this caucus behind this great leader. thank you very much. >> we have to go to work now. thank you. >> he is a blue dog democrat from north carolina. his bid to replace debt the policy as party leader was defeated in a 150-43 vote by secret ballot.

>> hello, everyone. today, we had our vote. it came out pretty much as i expected. it was not about winning the race. it was about having a voice within our caucus. i want to thank my members that are behind me that have supported me. jim, mike have done an unbelievable job. larry, an incredible member from north carolina. it was not about winning or losing. it was about making a difference within our caucus. to ensure that the moderates are heard within the caucus and that we have a seat at the table. that is what most of america would pass, that our caucus would move in that direction.

we have to be able to communicate to the american people in order to win back the election in 2012. >> to be able to get that many votes. that is a lot better than what we expected. we probably never expected -- we only have 20 something blue dogs. >> how did you see this going forward? [inaudible] >> that was the commitment that she has made. that was the commitment that a lot of the members have really come to us and said, they have to have a seat at the table. that is the only thing that will be best for our caucus. that will be best for the democratic party. >> [inaudible] >> it was a message from the

standpoint that there are more than just the blue dogs do have a concern with what is going on. that message has been loud and clear. look what timing is. there was a lot of unrest in the room for several hours. it was a substantial 68 votes. it sends a message, but in a way that is constructive. >> do you think a presentation -- [inaudible] >> it will be a challenge. it depends upon how that challenge is meant. -- is met. it will be held they articulate

their own personal message would then their communities and their districts and to be able to be elected. >> [inaudible] >> no. >> [inaudible] >> no. >> [inaudible] >> [inaudible] >> i think we have always ben -- always been in a situation where the most important thing is whether you are in the majority or the minority. it is what can we do to make sure the american people and the next generation -- far too often, my colleagues on the other side have. we have to make sure we have the right policy in place. working with both sides to make sure that the next generation

will have the same kind of advantages that we know today. >> have any have you given any consideration to switching parties? >> no. we are a very large party. that was my message today. to be able to have a large tent with then a democratic party in order for us to be successful. we have to make sure that we include everyone and that we all have a seat at the table and we alt -- we do not always have the same message. we truly believe in the middle class and making sure that we move the country forward. thank you.

>> incoming freshman congressman mike kelly. we will look at the screening procedures with laura murphy. the management news editor of the compensation package for the ceo of america's biggest corporations. "washington journal begins live at 7:00 eastern on c-span. >> the house ethics committee meets thursday to decide on any sanctions for charles rangel. found guilty of 11 counts of violating a fund-raising roles. look back at his career in the u.s. house. what what you want, when you want. >> every weekend, experience american history tv, starting saturday at 8:00.

48 hours of people and events telling the american story. here historic speeches by national leaders. visit museums, historical sites, and college campuses as top history professors and leading historians delve into america's past. all weekend, every weekend. >> tsa administrator testified at a senate hearing today. he was questioned about new passenger imaging machines and what -- and then -- and enhanced pat downs. this is an hour-and-a-half.

>> this hearing will come to order. i have to go rescue the health care bill and the finance committee where it will be assault on all sides. takeover, as he should. turn on the tv, pick up the newspaper, in the past 48 hours, there been a steady stream of stories about airport screening procedures. i appreciate peoples' concerns. i am understand that there is a frustration. i realize that some of the screening procedures appear in basis. we had a terrific session at the beginning of this week. we went into a lot of this. the new procedures embodied the

enormously difficult task, impossible task, of balancing the need to protect the public and the need to maintain their privacy. how do you do that? one of my first question is for you, concerns these procedures. and how you came to develop the new security regulations. i do recognize the threat that we face. i used to chair the senate intelligence committee. the threats are extremely real and extremely ongoing and it is evolving every day and the only -- something has not happened because the intelligence has been so good. we cannot expect that to last. we face a deadly and determined animated 6 to do us harm. animated 6 to do us harm.