friend from virginia, mr. goodlatte, we will be having a bipartisan reading of the constitution. and, madam speaker, our founders undetood better than anyone the importance of restraining federal power. i think that thomas jeffern put it best when he said in questions of power let no more be heard of confidence in man but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution. madam speaker, in the coming congress, this congress,e will focus. we will refocus our efforts on fulfilling our constitutional duties in a transparent and responsible way. we will be reform-minded and accountability-oriented. and we will be driven by the number-one concern of the american people, getting our economy back on track. madam speaker, form dictates

function and these new rules will set us on the path toward greater economic growth and confidence for the american people. and with that i urge support of this very important resolution d reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlen reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i want to yield one minute to the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, who as i said is disenfranchised by this rule, millions of americans will be under-represented, ms. norton, one minu. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from the disict of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: i thank the gentlelady from new york for yielding. madam speaker, for myself and for the delegates of the american samoa, guam, virgin islands and northern mariana islands i offer the motion earlier that the house conduct a full and complete study of the constitutionality of the vote of

the committee in the whole of delegates which are eliminated by this rule. this is the same motion that the republicans offered when we first were granted the right to vote on the house floor. it was challenged by the court and found constitutional. madam speaker this vote is a mere recognition of our american citizenship. delegates are no different from others in this house. it is one thing not to have the vote, it is quite another to be stripped of your vote. the vote is said to be symbolic by some. well to us it is symbolic. it is symbolic of the american citizenship of our constituents. it meant everything to us. there are differences among us, of course. we ask you to think again about this vote and to restore the vote of the delegates on the floor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from california.

mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm very pleased to yield two minutes to our distinguished colleague, a member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from auburn, washington. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for two minutes. mr. reichert: i thank the gentleman for yielding. madam speaker, i'm excited to be here today and i thank my constituents for the opportunity to once more serve them again as their representative here in the united states capitol. in the days ahead congress will debate and pass proposals that wi affect the health and the livelihood and the well-being of every american citizen. today as mr. dreier said we are setting the tone now for how well we will serve them this congress. our service should first and foremost be transparent and be respectful, be inclusive, work together. so i'm proud that legislation that i authored a couple of

years ago is now included in this rules package that we're about to vote on today. my bill requires each of the 21 standing committees in this house to post recorded votes on their websites within 48 hours because americans deserve to know how bills take shape at every step along the way. they deserve easy access to votes taken not just on the floor but also in the committee. governnt transparency is essential to a healthy democracy. by using existing committee websites we can offer this information in fiscally respsible and easily accessible way and i'm pleased that my work was included in this bill and i thank the gentleman again for yielding and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, for the purpose of unanimous consent, i yield to the gentleman from puerto rico, mr. per lucy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.

mr. perriello: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the resolution and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: i yield to the gentlewoman from guam. the speaker pro tempore: the delegate is recognized. ms. bordallo: madam speaker, i rise in opposition to the resolution and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: i yield to the delegate from the virgin islands, dr. christensen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. christensen: thank you. i ask unimous consent, mr. speaker, to revise and extend my remarks in opposition to this rule. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: i yield to the gentleman from american samoa, mr. faleomavaega. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. faleomavaega: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that my statement be submitted and made part of the record and on behalf of the tens and thousands of our men and women in military uniform from the u.s. territies, just ask my good friend, the honorable speaker, restore our symbolic vote. that's all we're asking for.

i yield back. ms. slaughter: i yield for the purpose of unanimous consent request mr. sablan of northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the resolution and ask to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: and i yield two minutes to the gentleman from maryland, the minority whip, mr. hoyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. hoyer: the gentleman who laments his loss of his magic minute. i rise in opposition to this rule, not for smalleasons of this rule or that rule but because it authorizes trillions of dollars of new debt without paying for it. there are two ways to create debt, you can buy things and not pay for it or you can simply cut revenues and make yourself unable to pay for things. statutory pay-go was designed to accomplish the objective of having us do what is difficult

to do, pay for what we buy. if we're honest with one another it dsn't matter whether you want to spend or simply cut revenues. if you don't do both, cut spending and either maintain or cut revenues consistent with your cutting of spending,then you will inevitably cate new debt. all of you have heard about my three children, my three jandchildren and my one great-granddaughter. they frankly won't care how the debt was created. it was created because we cut revenues but didn't cut spending which is what happened of course in the 2000's, what happened in the 1980's, where we curred trillions of dollars of additional debt. during the clinton administration we didn't do that. and we restrained spending, our republican colleagues were very helpful in doing that,

obviously. and we continued to pay for what we bought. we created four years of surplus. so i oppose this rule because of the trillions of dollars that it will authorize be incurred in new debt. secondly i oppose this rule as my friends from the various territories from puerto rico and from the district of columbia and the pacific islands. we talked about during the course of the campaign listening to people. we have almost five million people who are american citizens. how do we listen to them? we listen to them when their representatives put their green or red on the board. i will be introducing a resolution tomorrow which will be referred to the rules committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. ms. slaughter: may i yield the gentleman another minute? the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman is recognized for one additional minute. mr. hoyer: i tell my friend, the chairman of the rules committee, congratulations to himor his attaining the chairmanship. a thoughtful and hardworking member of this house will chair the rules committee. i'm going to be introducing an amendment to the rules that my presumption is we will adopt today which will return this symbol of respect, this symbol of inclusion, this symbol of colleagueship, if you will, to our six representatives of american citizens. i hope my friend will hold hearings on that. i would like to testify on that issue. and i say to my friends that i hope we reject these rules so thate can correct both the trillions of dollars of exposure that it creates and to ensure the inclusion in a real and meaningful way but not

constitutionally objectionable way our friends who represent the district of columbia and our territories and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i might consume. i'd like to respond to some of the comments made by my very good friend, the minority whip. on the issue of cut-go versus pay-go i think it's important to note that in the bipartisan agreement that was put together just last month, supported by president obama, there w an actualmbrace of the john f. kennedy vision of recognizing that economic growth and an enhanced revenue of levels to the federal treasurcome about by keeping marginal rates low. mr. speake that was a bipartisan agreement. and so what we've said is that as we look at growing the economy we are very enthused at

the fact that job creators are going to be able to have revenues focused on job creating, therefore enhancing the opportunity for more revenues coming to the federal treasury. second, i think it'slso very important for us to realize that the focus disease need to be on spending -- does need to be on spending. we believe that in the last four years, since we've seen a 92% increase, a 92% increase, mr. speaker, in nondefense discretionary spending, that we need to have a laser-like focus on that. now democrats and republicans, mr. speaker, have come together to decry both the lack of jobs that exist in our economy as wells deficit spending. there's clear bipartisan agreement on. that we all want to create more private sector jobs and we all want to see the deficit reduced. now how is it, mr. speaker, that we deal with those two issues?

the single most important thing that we can do to ensure that we address that is to ensure economic growth. and so the notion behind pay-go which would in fact bring about unfortunately an increase i taxes that dramatically would stall this recovery and even keynesian economists, those through the 1930's, 1940's, there are many people who have followed his economic model, that being stimulating through greater federal spending, keynesian economists, mr. speaker, acknowledge that increasing taxes when you're dealing with a difficult economy in fact undermines the potential for economic growth. flow let me take the second issue that my friend mentioned, mr. speaker, and that issue has to do with the question of our delegates.

they're all friends of mine. and i respect, i visited most of the territories, if not all, and i will say that these are very diligent, hardworking members, but we all know what the bottom line comes to here. the bottom line comes down to is that the vote here in the committee of the whole counts until it doesn't count and it doesn't count if it counts. and that's why i understand and my friend mr. faleomavaega said correctly, this is a symbol. it is a symbol and i think that their membership and participation on committees is important and there a great deal of camaraderie that does go on with our friends, but the fact is when you have a structure where the vote counts until it doesn't count and doesn't count if it counts, it seems to me that that is not the proper root for us to -- route

for us to take. that's the reason this action has been taken and with that -- if my friend would like to yield for a moment, i'd ke to yield to the minority whip. mr. hoyer: i thank the chairman for yielding. i tell my friend, you and i have been here some period of time, and -- mr. dreier: i've been here a few months lost longer than my friend has. mr. hoyer: that's true so i'll be very respectful. i've heard that argument that you just made, made in 1981, in 1989 and again in 2001. i tell my friend, my experience has been that it hasn't worked and we have inkurd substantial trillions of dollars of debt -- incurred substantial trillions of dollars of debt pursuing the rules committee philosophy that is represented in your rule. on the other hand a bill that you opposed and every member of your party opposed in 1993 which you say was pursuing a

job-killing policy in fact created more jobs than any other administration sin you and i have served here, some 22 million jobs, and additionally balanced the budget. mr. dreier: reclaiming my time. if i could reclaim my time. mr. hoyer: we did in fact balance the budget. mr. dreier: i thank my friends on his thoughtful remarks. if i could reclaim my time i would say i began by talking about a great democratic president, john f. kennedy, who used this model and looking at 1981, 1989 and 2001 is not the simple basis for the argument that i'm propounding. i'm beginning, if you look at modern history, with john f. kennedy as president of the -- and i will also say in looking at the 1993 bill, i am convind as i stand here today that if we hadded simply that tax increase -- if we had had simply that tax increase and in

4-, 5-, 6-that focused on -- in 1994, 199 5,1996 that focused on job creation we wouldn't enjoy the tremendous period of time of growth through the decade of th1990's which as we all know was the time that the republicans were in fact in control here. let me ask, ms. slauder or mr. rangel or somebody else, if i could reserve the balance of my time, i'd love to hear my friend, if ms. slaughter would yield to him. mr. rangel: i just wanted the gentleman from california -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is not recognized. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, as the end of this debate, if we defeat the previous question, mr. van hollen of maryland will insert an amendment to restore discipline in the house. i want to yield to mr. van

hollen, four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, on this opening day of this new congress, i hope we work together to tackle the basic problems that hurts our country. we heard that by the outgoing speaker, nancy pelosi, and by the incoming speaker, john boehner. that's why the rules package put forward by the republican majority not less than two hours ter those mments were made is so disappointing. because after months on the campaign trail, telling the american people that they want to reduce deficits and the debt, this rule opens the door to larger deficits and a bigger national debt. it is a fiscally reckless blueprint and the american people deserve better. why do i say that? because this plan guts the existing pay-as-you-go rule that limits mandatory spending

and tax breaks that add to our deficits. it also creates a mechanism to do an and run to the pay-as-you-go law recently signed by president obama that will limit increases in our national debt. how does this propose do that? the rule and the laws we've been operating on say you can't add to the deficit by adding new spending entitlements. this rulproperly keeps that restraint as it should, but the rule beingroposed, the plan being proposed also says you can't add to the deficit by -- eliminates the procession, you can't add to the deficit by creating special interest tax breaks. the proposal before us eliminates that limitation. it says that the congress will ignore the deficit impt of tax breaks, whether they're for hedge funds or other special interests. now, mr. speaker, every small

business knows that there are two sides to balancing the books. the cost incurred by the business and the revenue the business brings in. this one-sided rule ignores half of that equation. no small business could operate and survive that way in the united states, and neither can the federal government. so, mr. speaker, if we defeat the previous question i plan to offer an amendment to the republican plan that is very simple. it says that a measure may only qualify for an exemption under this subsection if it does not increase the deficit over the period of fiscal years 2011 through 2021 beyond the exemptions permitted under the current law of the land under statutory pay-go. and at the appropriate moment, we will offer that. mr. dreier: will the gentleman yield? mr. van hollen: i'll be happy to yield to the gentleman. >> they promised accountability but they're delivering hi

pockrassy. they said that their number one goal wilbe job creation. there's not a bill, not a word, not an idea about job creation in the first two weeks of the congress. mr. andrews: they said they were going to reduce the debt and the deficit. well, mr. van hollen very accurately points out, this bill says we'll reduce the deficit except when we deal with health care or tax cuts for the wealthy in which case we'll pretend it doesn't exist. we'll pretend there's no deficit when it comes to health care, the largest expenditure, and then for the wealthiest. and then hours ago the majority said we're going to cut $100 billion from this year's budget. and then they said, we really didn't mean $100 billion. we are going to cut something but we'll tell you later what it is. americans who are concerned about the debt and the deficit should be very concerned about the lack of accountability they're seeing here today.

a rule that blows open the deficit, a procedure that ignores job creation and $100 billion promise that just vanished like the champagne bubbles at the special -- thspeaker prtempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, at this time i'm happy to yield to the very distinguished new republican whip, my good friend and fellow colleague, the gentleman from bakersfield, mr. mccarthy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mccarthy: thank you, madam speaker, for yielding. we are debating a rules package. why do we need to ha a rules package? because structure dictates behavior. for america, we know far too long that the structure of this house was dictating a behavior that the american public did not care for nor did they want. they watched for too long bills written by a few, come to the floor where members had not

even read it, the public had not been able to see it and a debate and a vote had been passed. we've watched where we didn't even have a open rule, not one freshman in this building who became a sophomore ever saw a rule. today is a new day. today is a new opportunity. now, what went into the rules package and how did you come about crafting it and creating it? well, it wasn't crafted today and it wasn't crafted with one side of the aisle. we reached out to both sides but we reached beyon this house. we reached where this house was supposed to go, to the people. last fall our nespeaker boehner asked us to open up to the american people and ask them what they needed from here. we created america speaking out. anybody could come in and give you an idea and not once did we ask them what party they were registered or affiliated with. just the power of the idea should win at the end of the day. you know what they said, they said a bill shouldn't come to the floor but it should have three days so not only members

of congress should read it but the public. you know what, it's in the rules. they said, you have a $1.3 trillion deficit, and for the first time since the budget act of 1974 passed, you don't even have a budget so you should make it harder to spend and easier to cut. well, that's what this rules package does. this rules package gives us an opportunity to do exactly what president lincoln wanted, a house of the people, for the people, by the people. and the structure at the end of the day will make it more open, more transparent and more accountable. that's what the people asked for and that's what we were sent here do. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts, a member of the rules committee, mr. mcgovern. the eaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. mcgovern: thank you. well, mr. speaker, tt didn't take long. our republican friends have been in charge of the house for about an hour and they are already up to their old discredited tricks.

they promised the american people they were serious about deficit reduction. apparently that promise was for campaign purposes only, because the republicans' rules package before us today paves the way for a huge explosion on our national debt to the tune of $5 trillion. that's trillion with a. the new republican majority will drag this country back to their fantasy land where deficits either don't matter or coulbe addressed by giving huge tax bres to the very, very wealthy. back here in the real world, their proposals will do real harm to real middle-class families. they want to slash funding for education, for infrastructure, for investments and new technology, for medical research, for job training, you name it. if the program benefits working families, it's on the chopping block. but if you're a wealthy hedge fund manager or huge defen contractor or a playboy son of a dead multimillionae, you're safe. as "the washington post" said in a recent editorial when it

comes to all tax cuts, it's all go, no pay. i will say to my republican friends, if you care about deficit reduction, if you meant what you said on the campaign trail, then vote against this misguided rules package. if you want transparency, then do away with the smoke and mirrors. if you want accountability, then stop the hypocrisy. this rules package is shameful. this new republican majority appears to determine what they've done in the past and that is dig this country deeper and deeper into debt. it is the wrong thing to do. vote no. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm happy to yield two minuteto the gentleman who led our efforto bring about reform of the rules and help put this package together, my very good friend, mr. bishop, the gentleman from utah. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman from utah is recognized for two minutes. mr. bishop: thank you, madam speaker. i appreciate the gentleman from california recognizing me. every time we talk about rules i realize for the majority of people their eyes kind of glaze over. but every kid who spent time in an elementary yard realizes that the rules are important to the game. we're here, though, on this floodoing the people's business and it is not a game. and the rules become significant. and the rules are significant because they a responsive to what the people have said. peopleold us very clearly they're interested in jobs, they're interested in spending. the rules package before us right now facilitates the growth of the former and helps end the limitation of the latter. true, pay-go will be replaced in this rule. pay-go was honored in its breach and suspension as often as its application and rlaced with cut-go, it zeros in on the real problem, which is spenng, and if indeed we suspend cut-go as frequently as

pay-go was suspended then it will be justified to criticize us at that particular time. this rule says committees are important. it's not just a box you check to say you have done regular order. we have now provided for time for committees to do their job. we havprovided for premeeting requirements and postmeeting requirements in accountability and respect for the product o the committees will be here on the floor. once again, in this rule, the constitution is now envogue again. and the bills will become readable so you will never see again a multihundred-page amendment coming before this floor in the wee hours of the morning. many of us that worked on these rules had legislative experience in our home states. we brought different ideas, realizing that a better process equals a better poll sifment we changed the schedule so that time management will be seriously considered. we have added to transparency for what takes place on e committee as well as on the floor. we, to use cliches, thought

outside of the box, but so doing we included more members than ever before, republicans and democrats, who were invited to give specific input into what we indeed are doing. we argued -- can i ask for 30 seconds? mr. dreier: i'm happy to give my friend additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bishop: we found that making the right decisions aren't necessarily a difficult process. all you need to do is throw strikes. satchel paige simply looked at one and said, just throw strikes. home plate, don't move. this rule are strikes because home plate don't move. will it change washington and the way we do business? yes, and appropriately s i yield back, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: thank you, madam speaker. and i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentlewoman from florida, former member and missed member of the rules committee, ms. castor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman fr florida is

recognized for one minute. ms. castor: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentlewoman yielding time. as a former member of the rules committee, i felt compelled to come to the floor of the house now because the republican rules package is asking us to vote on a huge deception of the american people. over the last year we've had a robust debate about deficits and debt in this country, and yet the first significant vote the republicans are aski us to vote on will add to burgeoning deficits and debt, and here's a good example. no matter how you feel about the health reform law, the nonpartisan c.b.o. says that that health reform law will cut the deficit by $143 billion over the next few years. well, what the republican rules package says when they bring up repeal of health reform next week they're not going to count that money.

they're going to add that again to the debt system of the first significant vote they'll have on the floor is going to et us on a course to add $143 billion to the deficit and debt. i urge everyone to oppose the rules package. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i'm happy to yield 45 seconds to the distinguished new chair of the committee on transportation and infrastructure, mr. mica. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mica: i'd like to engage mr. dreier in the highway funding point of order included in this package as clause 3 of rule 21. it's my understanding that this point of order makes no change in the man for the which highway, highway safety, motor carrier safety a transit programs are currently funded, which is through contract authority derived om the highway trust fund and provided in authorization acts. rather the new point of order provides that members will have

the ability under house rules to offer amendment to reduce funding for such programs if they choose to do so in the interest of clarity and mutual understanding i want to be assured that my understanding of this proposed change to clause 3, rule 21, is correct. mr. dreier: if the gentleman will yield, i would say, madam speaker, that the gentleman from florida is correct. clause 3, rule 21 does not change the way underlying programs is funned through contract authority provided by authorization acts. mr. mica: i yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield two minutes to the ranking member on the transportation committee, mr. rahall. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from west virginia is recognized for two minutes. mr. rahall: i thank the distinguished gentlelady for yielding the time. while i regret i did not hear all the previous colloquy, i do want to express my strong reservation and opposition to these rule changes because of

the effects it would have on transportation-related issues. the republican rules package eliminates the current rule's direct tie to revenues of the highway trust funds paid by users through gas taxes at the pump and level investment for the programs. currently they provide that must find at levels set forth in transportation authorizations this provision was championed by republican budd shuster and was used to reduce funds building up in the highway trust fund to mask the true size of the federal deficit. it was intended to stop the same old smoke and mirrors game of federal fending. -- federal spending. as the first act of their majority, i find it incredible thatepublicans would pursue a job killing proposal like this, one that not only threatens jobs but could lead to cuts in spending for worthy jobs

throughout the nation. americans understand and support paying motor fuel taxes at the pump as long as they are guaranteed those will be spent on transportation. the republican package smears that dwarne tee and will have a devastating effect on vital highway and transit programs. after measure a decade of effort by the commiee on c&i, the house adopted the current rule in 1998. the rule is simple, the funds collected for transportation must be ed for that person. it has serd our house and nation well for the past 12 years. that'd house republican majority breaks that trust and are returning to the ways of old, no hearings or debate or any discussion on the effects of the proposele rule on transportation and investment. these are steeped in arcane budget rules and many members are not aware of what they're voting on and its consequences.

i urge my colleagues to oppose this rules change as do so many contractors. the speakepro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time, i'd like to yield two minutes to the very distinguished chairman of our transition committee, my friend from hood river, oregon, where walden. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. walden: i wanted to talk briefly about the transition itself and about the -- thank the members of both parties who participated in meaningful ways in our transition. four members of our team were incoming freshmen, we offered depps the opportunity participate both formally and informly, anct of bipartisanship that's been missing, frankly from prior organizations going back over both parties tenure in leadershipism asked speaker

pelosi to designate two democratic participants, we distributed surveys to every member on both sides of the aisle to get as many ideas as possible to reform the people's house. let us always remember this is the people's house, it is their business and the taxpayers' money and the public has the right to observe and participate in this process. the outcome is the rules package before us today. the transition team received more than 2,000 suggestions from the general public submitted through our website and what d we accomplish? bills will be post-ed line in a searchable format at least three days before receiving a vote on the house floor. no longer will bills be dropped in t middle of the night and voted on the next day. we require that all bills include a citation of constitutional authority so congress respects the limits imposed on it by the founding documents. to begin to control the explosion in spending, we're clamping down on budgetary slights of hand that hide spending behind thfirst

10-year window of a bill. any legislation projected to increase the deficit by $5 billion in any single tenure window out 10 years will be subject to a point of order. a new cut-go rule that increases authorizations or creates now programs to make equal or greater cuts else where a legislative calendar to make sure members are back home listening to people who sent us here at least a week every month. ending the practice of passing omnibus bill in an effort to to the avoid public scrutiny and will require every committee to webcast their hearings and markups and make them available online. transparent, open, accountable,s the rules package to change the house. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from vermont, mr. welch. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. welch: i thank the gentlelady from new york.

let me acknowledge two things, one, the republican majority won the election and has the right to bring the rules package to the floor. number two there are some good provisions in this, mr. walden described several. but three there is a major time bomb in this. the major responsibility we have in congress is to debate taxes and spending. taxes and spending. and the provision that basically will protect privileged tax breaks so we cannot have a debate about whether or not a hedge fund billionaire should pay at least the same rate of income tax as his or her chauffeur or cook, the fact that we cannot have a debate as to whether mature and profitable industries should continue to get taxpayer subsidies like the oitri-instead of being able to divert them to emerging technologies, the fact that these are off the table so that the only outcome will be cuts in spending that affect every single person without any debate, that's the problem and

when mr. mccarthy says that the rules dictate behavior, he left out that the rules dicta outcome as well. i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: thank you very much, madam speaker. may i inquire how much time remains on each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california has 4 1/4 minutes remain, the gentlewoman from new york has 11 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. dreier: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewon from new york. ms. slaughter: i yield one minute to the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: madam speaker, i ask to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. jackson lee: madam speaker,

today was a glorious day but as we begin to discuss the rumes that are now taking place -- the rules that are now taking place, i raise questions. i'd like to understand if we're going to go forward in a fiscally responsible way, and i've heard so much about the tea party and i welcome certainl the expressions of those who have been elected as republicans of those views, but we stand in this house, republican and democrat and some independents to work on issues r the american people. how do you in fact then eliminate in some see the pay as you go rule which we've all been committed to which allows us to pay for what we want to encourage the american people to have. but now we have a rule that says you cannot raise revenue so if your soldiers on the battlefield nees need moreesources, you can only get it by cutting spending of some other vulnerable population. what sense does that make? when we speak open rules, what sense does it make to have a rule tomorrow that indicates

that we're repealing the health care bill under a closed rule? we'll be saving only $143 billion other 10 yearus that rule would not allow that. this is a rules package that needs fixing, and i hope we can go back to the drawing board. i yield back. mr. dreier: i yield two minutes to the distinguished chair of the committee on the budget, the gentleman from jamesville, wisconsin, mr. ryan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. ryan: thank the gentleman from los angeles, california, for yielding. madam speaker, it's a good day because we're bringing some fiscal sanity back to this institution. what governeded this place with the rules in theast two congresses was a rule called pay-gofmente let me walk you through what pay-go accomplished. before we had the democrat's pay-go rule, the deficit was $161 billion. now it's $1.4 trillion. its report card wasn't so good. over the last two congresses,

pay- was waived 32 times for a net total of $932 billion in extra deficit spending. but when pay-go was used, when it was invoked, it was more often used to raise taxes. madam speaker, we do not have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. that is why this brings cut-go. cut-as-you-go. if you want new spending, cut spending somewhere else to pay for it. this does a couple of other things, it gets rid of a gimmick used artfully in the last congress to use reconciliation procedures to grow more government and crow ate- create new spending programs. it also adds a new rule that says, we need to look at the fiscal consequences in the future of what we're doing, not just in five years or 10 year bus in the out years because the debt crisis is coming, mark my words. it also gets rid of the automatic debt increase. we used to call this the

gephardt rule. congress has to vote clear up or down as to whetheor not to extend the debt limit. what also happed last session for the firstcy time since the 1974 budget act passed, the house didn't propose, let alone pass, a budget. this gives us an interim authority to put a budget in place so we can have a mechanism to police the budget. we have no budget. we have no limits. no restrnts. no priorities whatsoever. beuse of the fail dwhroifer leadership in the last congress and that is why this interim authority occurs so that we can put some numbers in from the c.b.o. to police and actually have budget enforcement until the new budget arrives. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentleman from new york, mrrangel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for one minute. mr. rangel: thank you, madam ranking member. i come to the floor opposing the

rule only because there's a provision in it that indicates that delegates from all over the globe will not be allowed to exercise any of their voting privileges that they had earlier. and when my friend mr. dreier the chairman -- the distinguished chairman of the committee indicated it was all symbolic, i just would hope that if we do get a chance to pull this out o the package and perhaps vote on this in a separate way, that you might see your way clear to understand at these americans and citizens who volunteer and fight for this great country and support our flag and in many cases have per capita more of their young people killed in action and wounded in action than those of us on the mainland, that i think it deserves a better classification

than to say that it's respecting their friends and hard working and it's symbolic. mr. dreier: would the gentleman yield for one second? i will simply say i was quote mr. faleomavaega and mr. hoyer when they used that term. i thank the gentleman. the speaker pro teore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i said i was simply quoting the gentleman, mr. faleomavaega, and mr. hoyer, using the term symbol. symbolic. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i reserve the balance of my ti. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves his time. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter spm i'm -- ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield one minute to mr. ellison. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. ellison: i thank the

gentlelady for the time. i rise in opposition to this rule but in one way i'm thankful for it because it does help to go right to the heart of the matter, right to the thing that divides us most, on the one ha, republicans want to give tax cuts to the wealthiest americans and shrink government services, on the other hand, democrats want to have adequate funds to fund services that are necessary for the american people. and this rule, which i ask all members to oppose, the republican rule, tax cuts will no longer have to be paid for. they will -- don't have to be budget neutral. so tax cuts passed by the house can increase the deficit. also in the republican rule, increases to mandatory spending must be paid for by reducing spending somewhere else. therefore, if the house wanted to extenthe child tax credit to minimum wage families, then the republican new rules would not allow this to be paid for by closing a corporate loophole.

instead, they would have to be paid for by taking away from some other group of people. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. ellison: this is wrong and it speaks to the heart owhat divides us. i'm glad we're doing this today. the eaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i will continue to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: let me yield one minute to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. pallone. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. pallone: thank you, madam speaker. today is rules package -- today's rules package reveals one thing and it is hi pack rassy. the republicans' first act in the majority will be to allow a legislative process that goes back to exploding our national debt. it will replace a strict pay-as-you-go policy to cut-as-you-go in which mandatory spending that needs to be paid for but tax cuts do

not. that means republicans can tut taxes for the rich and increasing the deficit as they do it. but, madam speaker, it gets worse. the republicans know the new health care reform bill reduces the deficit by over $1 trillion over the next two decades. and they put an exemption in their rule, as long as we're repealing the health care reform we can -- they're failing to live up to the standard they have set for themselves. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the president of the united states. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: mr. secretary. e secretary: i am directed by the president of the united states to deliver to the house of representatives a message in writing. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i am going to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to

yield another minute to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. andrews: the question that will be before the ladies and gentlemen of the house on this rules package is, do you want to honor the commitment to reduce the deficit or abandon it. the rules plan permits an abandonment of the promise to reduce the deficit because it ignores the fiscal consequences of the repeal of the health care bill which the congressional budget office says it will reduce the deficit by more than $1 trillion over the next 20 years. and it ignores the fiscal consequences of permanently extending the tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 for the wealthiest americans. this is not a question of liberal or conservative, republican or democrat it's a question of honoring a promise or abandoning it. for those who wish to honor the

promise of deficit reduction, the right vote on this rules package is no. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i'll continue to reserve the balance of my time. actually, may i inquire of my good friend, the distinguished former chairman of the rules committee, the distinguished ranking member, how many speakers she has remaining? ms. slaughter: yes, indeed. i believe three or four. mr. dreier: three or four. in light of that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time and look forward to those remarks. ms. slaughter: i'm pleased to yield to the gentleman from texas, mr. daugherty, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is cognized for one minute. mr. doggett: these republicans take a giant step backwards. they profess such great concern about their ability to cut wasteful spending, but first off, they abandon pay-as-you-go budgeting returning to the bush-cheney approach of endless borrowing. they claim they could cut so much but they reject a rule that requires them to cut spending as one way to offset

revenue losses for each new tax break they approve. they're misleading cut-go just cuts fiscal discipline and say, go borrow from the chinese. these republicans are like the fellow who bellies up to the bar and says, just one more round of tax breaks for my buddies, put it on my tab. except it's our tab, all americans will pay for their endless borrowing for endless tax breaks. they are indifferent to our national debt except when it comes to cutting vital initiatives that they wanted to weaken or eliminate in the first place. we need pay-as-you-go budgeting justike a family that faces a high credit card debt and knows it can't balance its budget by cutting off its income and simply cutting school lunch or other necessary its. neither can america, -- necessities. neither can america. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: i am pleased to

yield one minute to the gentleman from virginia, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for one minute. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. deficit reduction requires tough choices and pay-go helped make those tough choices because if you increased spending you had to pay for it, either raise the moneyr cut spending somewhere else. if you cut taxes you have to raise someone else's taxes or cut some programs. you have to pay for it. in 1993 under pay-go in a tough democratic budget we eliminated the deficit and we were on our way to paying off the national debt. we created millions of jobs and, unfortunately, 15 democrats lost their seats in a budget that the democrats voted for, not a single republican voted for. these are tough choices. unfortunately, this package fails to make those tough choices because it exempts trillions of dollars from pay-go. mr. speaker, you simply are not having a serious discussion about deficit reduction when the discussion begins with massive tax cuts which will ad trillions of dollars to the

national debt without beginning to pay for them at all. we need to get serious about deficit reduction. this package does not do it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i have two more speakers and i'd like to ask my colleague, mr. dreier, if he'd be prepared to close at that time. if he has any more speakers. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, let me say to my good friend that i think under this new arrangement that i will be the final speaker after -- ms. slaughter: absolutely. mr. dreier: after my friend has exhausted all of her speakers and her closing remarks. ms. slaughter: but the question i need to know -- mr. dreier: i am the final speaker, mr. speaker. there are no other speakers. ms. slaughter: thank you. appreciate that. so i am going to yield a minute to the lady from pennsylvania, ms. schwartz. the spear pro tempore: the gentlewoman from pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. ms. schwartz: as i listen to this debate, i want to say that

many of my colleagues agree that we must take the deficit seriously but to do so we have to not only exame spending cuts but we have to look at tax expenditures. this new rule that is being presented, literally less than three hours since the republicans took control,ays simply that they will look at spending cuts as really costing -- cost savers or cost of the government but tax expenditures, tax cuts maybe for the wealthiest americans, maybe for certain companies, maybe some good, maybe some we'll even agree with but will not count them as part of a cost to government, as a reduction in the amount of revenue that we get into the government. they will simple lie ignore it and -- simply ignore it and get added to the deficit. for weeks and weeks before that they said deficit reduction was athe top of their agenda. it took them three hours to make that an untrue statement. they simply already set up a situation where they can add

trillions and trillions of dollars to the national deficit, and we can do nothing about it. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i am pleased to yield 2 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. the american people did not bargain for a plan in the first 24 hours of the new congress that would blow a hole in the deficit and expand the debt. the chairman of the rules committee mentioned the recent bipartisan tax agreement. we also recently had a bipartisan commission on the deficit and debt reduction, and they looked at both sides of the equation. spending and the fact that we created lots of tax loopholes that have lost revenue to special interests. and what this plan does, what this rule does is say that

doesn't matter, that doesn't count against the deficit. in fact, the existing rules under the house say that you cannot use the budget reconciliation process to add to the deficit. your rule specifically eliminates that restriction. your rule says, go ahead and use the budget reconciliation process to add to the deficit and debt. you strike it. you have a green lht. this -- not at this moment. this rule also contains on page 28 a little notice provision that opens the door to politically motivated enron-style accounting as the means to do an end run around the pay-as-you-go law signed by president obama. the current practice of this congress has been that we will use the budget estimates of the nonpartisan congressional budget office to determine the deficit impact on the laws that we pass here in this body for

the purpose of pay-as-you-go. that is while we should have a vigorous debate over policy we don't want politicians inventing self-serving budget numbers. now, theongressional budget office serves as our empe. they call the balls and the strikes, as you know. sometimes we don't like the calls they make. sometimes we do. but what this rule does is says we are going to take the umpire off the field when it comes to statutory pay-go. we're going to substitute our accounting for the folks whose professional job it is to determine the deficit impact of different legislation that we pass. and i think when the american people find out that this opens the doors to those kind of fun and games they are going to ask themselves, is this something i really bargained for. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, will the gentleman yield on that point? mr. van hollen: i yield briefly. mr. dreier: let me say to the commission, i think it's very

important to note that they argue that there is a reduction to 26% as the top corporate rate and 23% as the p -- mr. van hollen: reclaiming my time. they did that as part of a whole tax reform package that closed the tax loopholes that your proposal would open. the speaker pro tempore:he gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask members on both sides of the aisle to vote no on the previous question so that we can take serious action described by mr. van hollen to decrease the deficit rather than simply make it easier to give tax breaks to billionaires. and, mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to insert the text of the amendment in the record immediately prior to the vote on the previous question. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i urge a no vote on the previous question and on the rule and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the

balance of her time. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i yield myself the balance of the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, everyone is enthused about today. we have 96 new members of this institution. 87 republicans and nine democrats. nearly 100 new members. and they are here having carried a very strong and powerful message from the american people and that is we've got to create jobs, get our economy growing, reduce the size and scope and reach of government and do it in a more transparent, open and accountable way and, mr. speaker, that's exactly what we're doing. that's exactly what we're doing with this rules package. there seems to be a little disagreement on the notion of dealing with spending and taxes. and the fact of the matter is we all know, several of us have said it through the debate, we don't have a revenue problem. we have a spending problem. what we need to do is we need to focus on reducing spending,

and we are absoluty committed with a laser-like approach to doing that. it's going to be tough. it's going to be painful, and i hope that as we rehed out and had bipartisan inp on this rules package for the first time ever that we'll be able to do the exact same thing, mr. speaker, when we deal with the question -- when we deal with the question of getting our economy growing and the other challenges that lie ahead of us. we never before have had the opportunity that we're going to have in just a few minutes. the rules committee is going to meet after we are seated. and when i came to the rules committee two decades ago i was told by the dean of the washington press corps, david broder, that the rules committee hearing rule was small by design. why? to keep us out, mr. broder said to me. mr. speaker, during this qst for transparency, we are going to have online streaming of our

rules committee meeting that will take place after we are seated he. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous con sent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend tir remarks on this measure and it is with a great deal of zeal, enthusiasm a gratitude that i move th

she decided to keep a ph.d. in 80 vacation but give -- ph.d. in education. stand up. [applause]

you cannot picture me in those shoes no matter what the dress. the first hispanic woman to chair a committee. that is quite an accomplishment. we shall never forget that. [applause] we owe our success the someone did this. maybe you should not be here. you have had too much wind.

-- wine. thank you for everything you allow us to do to accomplish our goal. all of you are very special. but like the thing some individuals. -- i would like to think some .ndividuals from t

congressman javier. [applause] charles gonzalez from texas.

some who were here briefly left already. lisa jackson had to leave early prad. martin is here. please, join us. i am sorry. i believe with have frnaank sanchez still with us.

jim green, come on up.

>> let's say everyone have their welcome back. let's say hello to the members of the hundred 12th congress. we are so glad to have you. we are honored to welcome you back. for

we lick forward to a better america. godspeed. we need it. thank you for joining as tonight. i know it is a busy time in washington. thank you for making me for -- making the effort to be here. have a good night. happy new year.

[captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> on c-span, house rules prevent nancy pelosi hands of the gavel to john boehner then "washington journal." >> house republicans are moving ahead to pill the job killing health care and love for them

what to live coverage on c-span. >> i think it is great but the of -- great. the public to bear some responsibility. >> sunday, martha: raddatz on the war's in iraq and . >> here are debate on the house

rules pra. distinguished majority leader. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. cantor: i thank the gentleman, madam speaker. it's a great honor to call up the rules package for the 112th congress. two months ago voters sent a clear message of repudiation against a government that failed to deliver results. government for too long has operated under the flawed assumption that growing bigger and controlling more is necessarily better. consequently washington has grown inefficient, unfocused and wasteful. spending has gone progressively higher while results for all americans have not been

realized. our new majority stands for a different and better way. we believe in a government that controls less and spends less but accomplishes more. we believe in a smarter government, a more efficient government, a more focused government. the new house majority will be about cut and grow. we're going to cut spending and job-killing government regulations and grow the economy and private sector jobs. madam speaker, each day we will hold ourselves accountable by asking the following questions. are our efforts addressing job creation and the economy? are they cutting spending? and are they shrinking the size of the federal government while protecting and expanding individual liberty? if not, why are we doing it? this rules package reflects these priorities.

we establish a constitution-focused house of representatives which starts by reading the constitution of the united states on the house floor and requiring that every bill be accompanied by a statement of constitutional authority. we make in order our first spending cut, a reduction of at least 5% to congress' own budget, including members, leadership and committees. we replace pay-go with cut-as-you-go to ensure that all spending increases are offset by spending cuts elsewhere in the budget. and on all appropriations bills members can now offer spending reduction amendments which will help ensure that savings actually go towards cutting the deficit rather than being spent elsewhere. in this spirit over the coming weeks we will pass a repeal of last year's health care bill to

remove the strain on job creators. we will cut spending in the current fiscal year back down to 2008 prebailout levels and we will identify and eliminate job-killing regulations that are impeding capital formation in america. madam speaker, these actions will send a credible signal to families, businesses and financial markets that we are dead serious about getting spending under control and regaining our competitive footing in america. our majority will return america to prosperity by returning a culture of success. our mission is not to redistribute wealth or tell people how to live their lives, but instead to lift people up by giving them opportunity and encouraging them to take responsibility. by passing this rules package

we will take a significant step in the right direction. it will put us on the road toward weaning america off government programs as an economic lifeline and help us build a new, more hopeful future, rooted in limited government, long-term investment, innovation and entrepreneurship. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: thank you, madam speaker. and i am pleased to say this morning i am delighted to be here. i want to give my congratulations to mr. dreier on reclaiming the rules seat, and we are very keen on our side to make our case before you today. actually, my head is somewhat spinning because not 20 minutes ago the new speaker of the house of representatives stood where you are and said he's going to be listening to people

but the first order of business before the house came from the delegates who this rule disenfranchises, not only the delegate of the district of columbia but all the teverers to -- territories, they didn't get to say a word. my head is spinning at that point. and we hope they can get unanimous consent so they can get some message into the record. but it's, again, part of the rhetoric of the last campaign that keeps spinning in our heads. all we want to do, they said, was to bring down the deficit. we're going over the cliff, we have to bring down the deficit. as we stand here today on the brink of a new session of congress, the concern of that deficit has since disappeared from everything except the press releases. the other side would gut pay-go and the pay-as-you-go rules adapted by the house and senate in 2007 under which cash cuts or increase in entitlement spending must be offset by

increases of entitlement cuts and it gave us the biggest surplus we have ever had under president clinton. it was a hallmark of the democratic leadership and we were proud of it. we adhered to responsible spending levels with affordable tax cuts and took sensible steps toward controlling the deficits but not today. the talk about deficit reduction is simply thrown out the window so they can free themselves and hand out more tax credits for their friends and corporations. under these proposed rules, notes "the washington post," tax cuts of the wealthiest are helpful but those at the other end of the income spectrum, forget about it. i will be reciting "the new york times" and "the washington post" and others that have crowd foul. they have slammed this hypocrisy at this attempt of fiscal as you taret. i'd like to ask unanimous consent to enter those columns

into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: what is crystal clear to me since they have double downed. dick cheney responded to the 2002 mid term elections by advocating more than $2 trillion in tax cuts. quote, deficits don't matter. we won the mid term elections. this is our due. end quote, said the vice president. the other side now wants to adopt the posture of budget cutters. they want to make sweetheart deals without having to pay for them. nor is this slithe of hand an isolated event. less than a month ago, republicans successfully held unemployment benefits for americans hostage until they got their wish. more bush era tax cuts for the people making more than $1 million a year. that package added another $140 billion to the deficit, didn't seem to bother them, although

they obviously they have told the world it's their number one priority. and just this week, republican new members ushered in the new congress with a $2,500 fund raidser at the w hotel in downtown washington. and lobbyists and political action committee members and others were treated to a night of drinks by -- and singing by country singer leean rhimes. last month, the incoming chairman of the house financial services committee offered his own assessment of republican oversight. he told birmingham news in alabama, in washington, the view is is that the banks are to be regulated. my view is that washington and the regulators are there to serve the banks, end quote. and according to "politico," the incoming house government oversight and government reform committee, big oil, big farmer

and big health will be helped. instead of all this business as usual and we are headed right back into where we were before 2006, what i'd like to see is an honest attempt to create a set of rules that provide for openness, transparency and good government. this set of rules is not that document. and i hope the other side, although i believe have good intentions, will join us in supporting this effort. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, congratulations, it's very nice to see you in the chair. let me ask unanimous consent that a section of section analysis of the resolution appear at this point in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i might consume and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: as we've seen here today, madam speaker, we are

marking an important turning point in the history of the united states house of representatives. we have before us a package of reforms that will bring greater transparency and accountability to this house and it will once again give the american people the opportunity, the opportunity to participate in the legislative process. they made clear to us that what their priorities are, job creation, economic growth and a smaller, more accountable federal government, must be done. the reforms included in this rules package are designed to ensure that those priorities are met and that we are held responsible for our actions to do the people's work. now, madam speaker, i want to thank each and every one of my colleagues who worked tirelessly on this rules package. never before, never before in history has there been the kind

of member involvement, bipartisan member involvement in an opening day rules package. i particularly want to thank my good friends, greg walden, who led our transition team, and rob bishop, who led the rules reform effort, as well as the other members of our transition working group. we had four new members of congress who right after the election got involved in working on this very, very important transition. and i want to express my appreciation. as i said, madam speaker, this has for the first time ever been bipartisan. now, i don't want to claim that my democratic colleagues are supportive of this rules package, but i will say that when we began the process, i'm happy that former speaker pelosi designated as liaisons to work with us through the transition process the distinguished former chair of the administration committee, mr. brady, and the gentleman

from new jersey, mr. andrews. and i want to express my appreciation to them again for their hard work. as we looked for ways to chart a new course and reduce congressional waste, we knew that we had to consider good ideas from both political parties. and that's why i'm happy to say we had input from both democrats and republicans in fashioning this opening day rules package. our democratic liaisons were tremendous partners and, again, i express my appreciation to my democratic colleagues for joining with us in this effort. now, having completed our transition work, we are now beginning a new congress. each of us faces the new beginning with the knowledge that congressional approval ratings are abysmally low. it's rare that the congress is held in high esteem by the american people. we all know that. but it is even rarer, it is even rarer to have an approval rating that is as low as it is

right now. now, why is it that this body has become so unpopular? the reason is that the american people felt they were not being listened to. they have sent us here to conduct the 112th congress differently than any other congress of the past. i'm not just going to talk about the last two congresses, madam speaker. i'm going to say that they sent us here this year to perform differently than any congress of the past. what's more, they've given us, as speaker boehner likes to say, some pretty simple and clear and direct marching orders when it comes to our work. fulfill our constitutional duties in an open and transparent way. now, madam speaker, this rules package that we have before us provides us the tools to do just what the american people have asked, to perform our

constitutional duties in a transparent and open way. because our highest priorities are job creation and economic growth, we must rein in the government spending that has spiraled out of control over the past several years. we're taking several steps to meet that goal. for starters, we're requiring that any new spending be offset for five 10-year budget windows. if a bill increases the deficit by more than $5 billion in any of these 10-year windows, it will be subjected to a point of order. in other words, we're changing the rules of the house to ensure that we look at short, medium as well as long-term consequences to federal spending. we should not and cannot consider legislation that pushes the federal budget deficit and the problems down the road.

we will also be reforming the spending process by replacing pay-go with cut-go. rather than parring with tax increases, -- paring with tax increases, we will pare it with spending cuts. it's often been said we don't have rieff knew problem. we have a spending problem. -- we have a revenue problem. we have a spending problem. these new rules will reduce spending rather than increase it. in fact, the idea behind this package is to focus on ways in which we can increase the opportunity, reduce spending rather than increase it. now, madam speaker, we're also taking important steps to make us more accountable to the american people, the people whom we're so honored to represent. we won't be voting on bills unless they've been available for at least three calendar days. we will be returning much of the legislative work back to the committees where greater transparency will be required.

the work product, the recorded votes and the video archives of all committees are required by these rules to be posted online . no longer will massive legislation be written behind closed doors regardless of political party and ram through the house before anyone has the chance to review or amend the text. our work will be done in an open way that affords all members the opportunity to participate and scrutinize. another key reform by this rules package is the creation of an electronic format for legislation. this represents a dramatic change in how legislation is made available. not just to members but to the public and the press as well. now, madam speaker, to the last two centuries, legislation was considered available when a paper copy was dropped off in the document room across the

street. now, it will be considered available when anyone with access to the internet can look it up. now, this new format will evolve over time and there's work ahead, still has to be done as we implement these rules changes. but no member should consider this vote as the end of the reform efforts of this congress. again, what we're doing here today is simply the first step in what is going to be an onyear two-year process of reform. we will not be webbed to the way we do things. rather, we'll be looking for new and different ways to do our jobs and to do them in the most transparent and accountable way. and let me say again, madam speaker, it's very important for us to ensure that we have the input of my friend from rochester, ms. slaughter, and other democrats as well as other republicans in this process. madam speaker, this rules package is a very significant

first step. we've learned the hard way that bad process enevidentably results in bad outcomes. we need to look no further than our ailing economy and spiraling deficit, not to mention congress' abysmal approval rating to see that that's true. by reforming the rules of the house we set the stage for reforming the entire federal government. ultimately we ensure fidelity to the original rules document, that being the constitution. and i'm so pleased that tomorrow on the house floor led by our friend from virginia, mr. goodlatte, we will be having a bipartisan reading of the constitution. and, madam speaker, our founders understood better than anyone the importance of restraining federal power. i think that thomas jefferson put it best when he said in questions of power let no more be heard of confidence in man

but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the constitution. madam speaker, in the coming congress, this congress, we will focus. we will refocus our efforts on fulfilling our constitutional duties in a transparent and responsible way. we will be reform-minded and accountability-oriented. and we will be driven by the number-one concern of the american people, getting our economy back on track. madam speaker, form dictates function. and these new rules will set us on the path toward greater economic growth and confidence for the american people. and with that i urge support of this very important resolution and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york.

ms. slaughter: madam speaker, i want to yield one minute to the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, who as i said is disenfranchised by this rule, millions of americans will be under-represented, ms. norton, one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from the district of columbia is recognized. ms. norton: i thank the gentlelady from new york for yielding. madam speaker, for myself and for the delegates of the american samoa, guam, virgin islands and northern mariana islands i offer the motion earlier that the house conduct a full and complete study of the constitutionality of the vote of the committee in the whole of delegates which are eliminated by this rule. this is the same motion that the republicans offered when we first were granted the right to vote on the house floor. it was challenged by the court and found constitutional. madam speaker this vote is a mere recognition of our american citizenship.

delegates are no different from others in this house. it is one thing not to have the vote, it is quite another to be stripped of your vote. the vote is said to be symbolic by some. well to us it is symbolic. it is symbolic of the american citizenship of our constituents. it meant everything to us. there are differences among us, of course. we ask you to think again about this vote and to restore the vote of the delegates on the floor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm very pleased to yield two minutes to our distinguished colleague, a member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from auburn, washington. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for two minutes. mr. reichert: i thank the gentleman for yielding. madam speaker, i'm excited to be here today and i thank my constituents for the opportunity

to once more serve them again as their representative here in the united states capitol. in the days ahead congress will debate and pass proposals that will affect the health and the livelihood and the well-being of every american citizen. today as mr. dreier said we are setting the tone now for how well we will serve them this congress. our service should first and foremost be transparent and be respectful, be inclusive, work together. so i'm proud that legislation that i authored a couple of years ago is now included in this rules package that we're about to vote on today. my bill requires each of the 21 standing committees in this house to post recorded votes on their websites within 48 hours because americans deserve to know how bills take shape at every step along the way. they deserve easy access to

votes taken not just on the floor but also in the committee. government transparency is essential to a healthy democracy. by using existing committee websites we can offer this information in a fiscally responsible and easily accessible way and i'm pleased that my work was included in this bill and i thank the gentleman again for yielding and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, for the purpose of unanimous consent, i yield to the gentleman from puerto rico, mr. per lucy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. perriello: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the resolution and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: i yield to the gentlewoman from guam. the speaker pro tempore: the delegate is recognized. ms. bordallo: madam speaker, i rise in opposition to the resolution and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my

remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: i yield to the delegate from the virgin islands, dr. christensen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. christensen: thank you. i ask unanimous consent, mr. speaker, to revise and extend my remarks in opposition to this rule. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: i yield to the gentleman from american samoa, mr. faleomavaega. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. faleomavaega: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that my statement be submitted and made part of the record and on behalf of the tens and thousands of our men and women in military uniform from the u.s. territories, just ask my good friend, the honorable speaker, restore our symbolic vote. that's all we're asking for. i yield back. ms. slaughter: i yield for the purpose of unanimous consent request mr. sablan of northern mariana islands. mr. sablan: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the resolution and ask to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. slaughter: and i yield two minutes to the gentleman from maryland, the minority whip, mr. hoyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes.

mr. hoyer: the gentleman who laments his loss of his magic minute. i rise in opposition to this rule, not for small reasons of this rule or that rule but because it authorizes trillions of dollars of new debt without paying for it. there are two ways to create debt, you can buy things and not pay for it or you can simply cut revenues and make yourself unable to pay for things. statutory pay-go was designed to accomplish the objective of having us do what is difficult to do, pay for what we buy. if we're honest with one another it doesn't matter whether you want to spend or simply cut revenues. if you don't do both, cut spending and either maintain or cut revenues consistent with your cutting of spending, then you will inevitably create new

debt. all of you have heard about my three children, my three jandchildren and my one great-granddaughter. they frankly won't care how the debt was created. it was created because we cut revenues but didn't cut spending which is what happened of course in the 2000's, what happened in the 1980's, where we incurred trillions of dollars of additional debt. during the clinton administration we didn't do that. and we restrained spending, our republican colleagues were very helpful in doing that, obviously. and we continued to pay for what we bought. we created four years of surplus. so i oppose this rule because of the trillions of dollars that it will authorize be incurred in new debt. secondly i oppose this rule as my friends from the various territories from puerto rico and

from the district of columbia and the pacific islands. we talked about during the course of the campaign listening to people. we have almost five million people who are american citizens. how do we listen to them? we listen to them when their representatives put their green or red on the board. i will be introducing a resolution tomorrow which will be referred to the rules committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. ms. slaughter: may i yield the gentleman another minute? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one additional minute. mr. hoyer: i tell my friend, the chairman of the rules committee, congratulations to him for his attaining the chairmanship. a thoughtful and hardworking member of this house will chair the rules committee. i'm going to be introducing an amendment to the rules that my presumption is we will adopt today which will return this

symbol of respect, this symbol of inclusion, this symbol of colleagueship, if you will, to our six representatives of american citizens. i hope my friend will hold hearings on that. i would like to testify on that issue. and i say to my friends that i hope we reject these rules so that we can correct both the trillions of dollars of exposure that it creates and to ensure the inclusion in a real and meaningful way but not constitutionally objectionable way our friends who represent the district of columbia and our territories and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i might consume. i'd like to respond to some of

the comments made by my very good friend, the minority whip. on the issue of cut-go versus pay-go i think it's important to note that in the bipartisan agreement that was put together just last month, supported by president obama, there was an actual embrace of the john f. kennedy vision of recognizing that economic growth and an enhanced revenue of levels to the federal treasury come about by keeping marginal rates low. mr. speaker, that was a bipartisan agreement. and so what we've said is that as we look at growing the economy we are very enthused at the fact that job creators are going to be able to have revenues focused on job creating, therefore enhancing the opportunity for more revenues coming to the federal treasury. second, i think it's also very important for us to realize that the focus disease need to be on spending -- does need to be on spending. we believe that in the last four

years, since we've seen a 92% increase, a 92% increase, mr. speaker, in nondefense discretionary spending, that we need to have a laser-like focus on that. now democrats and republicans, mr. speaker, have come together to decry both the lack of jobs that exist in our economy as well as deficit spending. there's clear bipartisan agreement on. that we all want to create more private sector jobs and we all want to see the deficit reduced. now how is it, mr. speaker, that we deal with those two issues? the single most important thing that we can do to ensure that we address that is to ensure economic growth. and so the notion behind pay-go which would in fact bring about unfortunately an increase in taxes that dramatically would stall this recovery and even

keynesian economists, those through the 1930's, 1940's, there are many people who have followed his economic model, that being stimulating through greater federal spending, keynesian economists, mr. speaker, acknowledge that increasing taxes when you're dealing with a difficult economy in fact undermines the potential for economic growth. flow let me take the second issue that my friend mentioned, mr. speaker, and that issue has to do with the question of our delegates. they're all friends of mine. and i respect, i visited most of the territories, if not all, and i will say that these are very diligent, hardworking members, but we all know what the bottom line comes to here. the bottom line comes down to is that the vote here in the committee of the whole counts until it doesn't count and it

doesn't count if it counts. and that's why i understand and my friend mr. faleomavaega said correctly, this is a symbol. it is a symbol and i think that their membership and participation on committees is important and there is a great deal of camaraderie that does go on with our friends, but the fact is when you have a structure where the vote counts until it doesn't count and doesn't count if it counts, it seems to me that that is not the proper root for us to -- route for us to take. that's the reason this action has been taken and with that -- if my friend would like to yield for a moment, i'd like to yield to the minority whip. mr. hoyer: i thank the chairman for yielding. i tell my friend, you and i have been here some period of time, and -- mr. dreier: i've been here a few months lost longer than my friend has. mr. hoyer: that's true so i'll be very respectful. i've heard that argument that

you just made, made in 1981, in 1989 and again in 2001. i tell my friend, my experience has been that it hasn't worked and we have inkurd substantial trillions of dollars of debt -- incurred substantial trillions of dollars of debt pursuing the rules committee philosophy that is represented in your rule. on the other hand a bill that you opposed and every member of your party opposed in 1993 which you say was pursuing a job-killing policy in fact created more jobs than any other administration since you and i have served here, some 22 million jobs, and additionally balanced the budget. mr. dreier: reclaiming my time. if i could reclaim my time. mr. hoyer: we did in fact balance the budget. mr. dreier: i thank my friends

on his thoughtful remarks. if i could reclaim my time i would say i began by talking about a great democratic president, john f. kennedy, who used this model and looking at 1981, 1989 and 2001 is not the simple basis for the argument that i'm propounding. i'm beginning, if you look at modern history, with john f. kennedy as president of the -- and i will also say in looking at the 1993 bill, i am convinced as i stand here today that if we hadded simply that tax increase -- if we had had simply that tax increase and in 4-, 5-, 6-that focused on -- in 1994, 199 5,1996 that focused on job creation we wouldn't enjoy the tremendous period of time of growth through the decade of the 1990's which as we all know was the time that the republicans were in fact in control here. let me ask, ms. slauder or mr.

rangel or somebody else, if i could reserve the balance of my time, i'd love to hear my friend, if ms. slaughter would yield to him. mr. rangel: i just wanted the gentleman from california -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is not recognized. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, as the end of this debate, if we defeat the previous question, mr. van hollen of maryland will insert an amendment to restore discipline in the house. i want to yield to mr. van hollen, four minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. van hollen: mr. speaker, on this opening day of this new congress, i hope we work together to tackle the basic problems that hurts our country. we heard that by the outgoing speaker, nancy pelosi, and by the incoming speaker, john boehner.

that's why the rules package put forward by the republican majority not less than two hours after those comments were made is so disappointing. because after months on the campaign trail, telling the american people that they want to reduce deficits and the debt, this rule opens the door to larger deficits and a bigger national debt. it is a fiscally reckless blueprint and the american people deserve better. why do i say that? because this plan guts the existing pay-as-you-go rule that limits mandatory spending and tax breaks that add to our deficits. it also creates a mechanism to do an and run to the pay-as-you-go law recently signed by president obama that will limit increases in our national debt. how does this propose do that? the rule and the laws we've been operating on say you can't add to the deficit by adding

new spending entitlements. this rule properly keeps that restraint as it should, but the rule being proposed, the plan being proposed also says you can't add to the deficit by -- eliminates the procession, you can't add to the deficit by creating special interest tax breaks. the proposal before us eliminates that limitation. it says that the congress will ignore the deficit impact of tax breaks, whether they're for hedge funds or other special interests. now, mr. speaker, every small business knows that there are two sides to balancing the books. the cost incurred by the business and the revenue the business brings in. this one-sided rule ignores half of that equation. no small business could operate and survive that way in the united states, and neither can the federal government. so, mr. speaker, if we defeat the previous question i plan to

offer an amendment to the republican plan that is very simple. it says that a measure may only qualify for an exemption under this subsection if it does not increase the deficit over the period of fiscal years 2011 through 2021 beyond the exemptions permitted under the current law of the land under statutory pay-go. and at the appropriate moment, we will offer that. mr. dreier: will the gentleman yield? mr. van hollen: i'll be happy to yield to the gentleman. >> they promised accountability but they're delivering hi pockrassy. they said that their number one goal will be job creation. there's not a bill, not a word, not an idea about job creation in the first two weeks of the congress. mr. andrews: they said they were going to reduce the debt and the deficit. well, mr. van hollen very accurately points out, this bill says we'll reduce the deficit except when we deal with health care or tax cuts

for the wealthy in which case we'll pretend it doesn't exist. we'll pretend there's no deficit when it comes to health care, the largest expenditure, and then for the wealthiest. and then hours ago the majority said we're going to cut $100 billion from this year's budget. and then they said, we really didn't mean $100 billion. we are going to cut something but we'll tell you later what it is. americans who are concerned about the debt and the deficit should be very concerned about the lack of accountability they're seeing here today. a rule that blows open the deficit, a procedure that ignores job creation and $100 billion promise that just vanished like the champagne bubbles at the special -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, at this time i'm happy to yield to the very distinguished new republican whip, my good friend

and fellow colleague, the gentleman from bakersfield, mr. mccarthy. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mccarthy: thank you, madam speaker, for yielding. we are debating a rules package. why do we need to have a rules package? because structure dictates behavior. for america, we know far too long that the structure of this house was dictating a behavior that the american public did not care for nor did they want. they watched for too long bills written by a few, come to the floor where members had not even read it, the public had not been able to see it and a debate and a vote had been passed. we've watched where we didn't even have a open rule, not one freshman in this building who became a sophomore ever saw a rule. today is a new day. today is a new opportunity. now, what went into the rules package and how did you come about crafting it and creating it? well, it wasn't crafted today and it wasn't crafted with one

side of the aisle. we reached out to both sides but we reached beyond this house. we reached where this house was supposed to go, to the people. last fall our new speaker boehner asked us to open up to the american people and ask them what they needed from here. we created america speaking out. anybody could come in and give you an idea and not once did we ask them what party they were registered or affiliated with. just the power of the idea should win at the end of the day. you know what they said, they said a bill shouldn't come to the floor but it should have three days so not only members of congress should read it but the public. you know what, it's in the rules. they said, you have a $1.3 trillion deficit, and for the first time since the budget act of 1974 passed, you don't even have a budget so you should make it harder to spend and easier to cut. well, that's what this rules package does. this rules package gives us an opportunity to do exactly what president lincoln wanted, a

house of the people, for the people, by the people. and the structure at the end of the day will make it more open, more transparent and more accountable. that's what the people asked for and that's what we were sent here to do. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from massachusetts, a member of the rules committee, mr. mcgovern. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. mcgovern: thank you. well, mr. speaker, that didn't take long. our republican friends have been in charge of the house for about an hour and they are already up to their old discredited tricks. they promised the american people they were serious about deficit reduction. apparently that promise was for campaign purposes only, because the republicans' rules package before us today paves the way for a huge explosion on our national debt to the tune of $5 trillion. that's trillion with a t. the new republican majority will drag this country back to their fantasy land where

deficits either don't matter or could be addressed by giving huge tax breaks to the very, very wealthy. back here in the real world, their proposals will do real harm to real middle-class families. they want to slash funding for education, for infrastructure, for investments and new technology, for medical research, for job training, you name it. if the program benefits working families, it's on the chopping block. but if you're a wealthy hedge fund manager or huge defense contractor or a playboy son of a dead multimillionaire, you're safe. as "the washington post" said in a recent editorial when it comes to all tax cuts, it's all go, no pay. i will say to my republican friends, if you care about deficit reduction, if you meant what you said on the campaign trail, then vote against this misguided rules package. if you want transparency, then do away with the smoke and mirrors. if you want accountability, then stop the hypocrisy. this rules package is shameful. this new republican majority appears to determine what they've done in the past and

that is dig this country deeper and deeper into debt. it is the wrong thing to do. vote no. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, at this time i'm happy to yield two minutes to the gentleman who led our effort to bring about reform of the rules and help put this package together, my very good friend, mr. bishop, the gentleman from utah. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized for two minutes. mr. bishop: thank you, madam speaker. i appreciate the gentleman from california recognizing me. every time we talk about rules i realize for the majority of people their eyes kind of glaze over. but every kid who spent time in an elementary yard realizes that the rules are important to the game. we're here, though, on this floor doing the people's business and it is not a game. and the rules become significant.

and the rules are significant because they are responsive to what the people have said. people told us very clearly they're interested in jobs, they're interested in spending. the rules package before us right now facilitates the growth of the former and helps end the limitation of the latter. true, pay-go will be replaced in this rule. pay-go was honored in its breach and suspension as often as its application and replaced with cut-go, it zeros in on the real problem, which is spending, and if indeed we suspend cut-go as frequently as pay-go was suspended then it will be justified to criticize us at that particular time. this rule says committees are important. it's not just a box you check to say you have done regular order. we have now provided for time for committees to do their job. we have provided for premeeting requirements and postmeeting requirements in accountability and respect for the product of the committees will be here on the floor. once again, in this rule, the

constitution is now envogue again. and the bills will become readable so you will never see again a multihundred-page amendment coming before this floor in the wee hours of the morning. many of us that worked on these rules had legislative experience in our home states. we brought different ideas, realizing that a better process equals a better poll sifment we changed the schedule so that time management will be seriously considered. we have added to transparency for what takes place on the committee as well as on the floor. we, to use cliches, thought outside of the box, but in so doing we included more members than ever before, republicans and democrats, who were invited to give specific input into what we indeed are doing. we argued -- can i ask for 30 seconds? mr. dreier: i'm happy to give my friend additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. bishop: we found that making the right decisions

aren't necessarily a difficult process. all you need to do is throw strikes. satchel paige simply looked at one and said, just throw strikes. home plate, don't move. this rule are strikes because home plate don't move. will it change washington and the way we do business? yes, and appropriately so. i yield back, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. slaughter: thank you, madam speaker. and i'm pleased to yield one minute to the gentlewoman from florida, former member and missed member of the rules committee, ms. castor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from florida is recognized for one minute. ms. castor: thank you, madam speaker. i thank the gentlewoman yielding time. as a former member of the rules committee, i felt compelled to come to the floor of the house now because the republican rules package is asking us to vote on a huge deception of the american people. over the last year we've had a robust debate about deficits and debt in this country, and

yet the first significant vote the republicans are asking us to vote on will add to burgeoning deficits and debt, and here's a good example. no matter how you feel about the health reform law, the nonpartisan c.b.o. says that that health reform law will cut the deficit by $143 billion over the next few years. well, what the republican rules package says when they bring up repeal of health reform next week they're not going to count that money. they're going to add that again to the debt system of the first significant vote they'll have on the floor is going to et us on a course to add $143 billion to the deficit and debt. i urge everyone to oppose the rules package. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i'm happy to yield 45 seconds to the distinguished new chair of the committee on

transportation and infrastructure, mr. mica. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mica: i'd like to engage mr. dreier in the highway funding point of order included in this package as clause 3 of rule 21. it's my understanding that this point of order makes no change in the man for the which highway, highway safety, motor carrier safety and transit programs are currently funded, which is through contract authority derived from the highway trust fund and provided in authorization acts. rather the new point of order provides that members will have the ability under house rules to offer amendment to reduce funding for such programs if they choose to do so in the interest of clarity and mutual understanding i want to be assured that my understanding of this proposed change to clause 3, rule 21, is correct. mr. dreier: if the gentleman will yield, i would say, madam speaker, that the gentleman from florida is correct. clause 3, rule 21 does not

change the way underlying programs is funned through contract authority proviby