with our limited income. i advise the american people to do the same, tighten their belts. host: since that was more of a comment and not a question, we will go to mary on the democratic line. go ahead. caller: my question is there is always a shutdown when somebody mentions -- host: what you mean by that? -- what do you mean by that? 40% of us who do not have health insurance and will not be able to get anything. i am 57 it will not be able to afford health insuranceright noe clinics. i even got a hysterectomy through free catholic charities. we need a public option.

host: we will leave it there. guest: the public option will continue to be a part of this debate, specifically as the law is implemented, all the way to 2017. when i said the public option is not viable now, i just met democrats in the senate to not have the votes for it and not actively looking for them and house republicans are actively opposed to it. if you have one side of the capital in the hands of the democrats and not actively seeking to work on the issue and the opposition party diametrically opposed, you are simply not getting movement on that issue. as the president that a health- care law is implemented and the degree it works or does not work or satisfies or dissatisfies, there will be continued debate from those who say, look, we told you from the beginning, single payer public option is the only way to unify the system. the debate will continue but just not going anywhere right now. host: for more on major garrett go to "-- nationaljournal.com.

. the chair recognizes the gentleman from south carolina, mr. wilson, for one minute. mr. wilson:k you, mr. speaker. this week the house will consider house resolution 389 which promotes a reduction of current spending to the 2008 levels or less for the remainder of the fiscal year. this legislation seeks to cure the illness in washington known as runaway spending. for the past four years, liberals in washington have been on a spending spree that has not only resulted in a loss of jobs, but also historic deficits. this job destroying agenda is not sound policy for americans today and it burdens future generations of americans with crushing debt. last week, the house took steps to repeal and replace the job-killing government takeover of health care, the nfib, the national federation of

independent business, the largest organization in the united states of small businesses, reports that that will put 1.6 million jobs at risk. now we must focus our attention on limiting spending levels. currently our national deficit stands at $14 trillion. sadly, future generations with today's debt is not the solution. the time has come to implement spending reforms to ensure we cut spending. the american people in november spoke clearly for fiscal responsibility. the tea party has made a difference. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. wilson: that is enough already. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from connecticut, ms. delauro, for five minutes. ms. delauro: it is with heavy heart i rise to pay tribute to former congressman really r. radford who lost a courageous battle with parkinson's disease. i spoke to many colleagues of bill in recent days and the same

descriptions came up. he was modest and charming and exactly who he appeared to be. one long-time friend called him the most fundamentally decent, unpretentious person. another former senator chris dodd reminded me of bill's decency and warmth. he was enthusiastic about other people's successes, chris said, which is sadly atypical of people in our line of business. bill was a role model to me and the rest of our delegation. he was a humble giant in connecticut politics, well liked and respected by all, and he will be deeply missed by all those fortunate enough to have known him. when i came to represent much of the part northern part of connecticut, bill took me personal town by town. everyone knew him. there was a mutual respect and fondness i've tried to live up to ever since. bill just had that effect on people. he was funny, kind, and down to earth. as be a humble son of a hat factory worker and a teacher he never forgot where he came fromful he understand his

constituents' needs and concerns because their concerns were his. he walked in their shoes. turning 12 years in the state house, four as speaker and three terms in the congress, bill focused on the needs of children and seniors, on improving be public education, helping nontraditional students go to college and ensure all seniors could enjoy retirement with the health and dignity they deserve. more than anything bill tried to make a difference in everything he did and doing so, he left an indelible mark on our state and in this institution. i extend my deepest sympathies to wife barbara and their cliff lee three children sean, scott and brian and his grandchildren. he was an extraordinary individual and he leaves a legacy to which we should all aspire. i yield to the gentleman from connecticut, mr. courtney. mr. courtney: thank you, congresswoman delauro. mr. speaker, i want to associate my remarks with congresswoman delauro's eloquent. bill ratchford was a giant,

served as speaker in the state legislature, as a former state legislator myself i saw firsthand the legacy he left behind in terms of a civil but progressive agenda in the state of connecticut as a member of congress for three terms he continued that work. again particularly focusing on the emerging issues of the aging and in our country which again as a demographic is growing and he was really just someone with great vision in terms of the need to make sure that we had a society that was prepared to deal with those issues. mr. speaker, as we grapple with the challenge of civil discourse in our democracy, bill in my opinion is the perfect almost iconic example of what a legislator and a public servant ought to be. he cared deeply about the issues that he campaigned and advocated for but he also was someone who studiously respected his

opposition and believed passionately in civil discourse and debate. and again, i think that legacy probably above all is the most powerful one he leaves behind us and in fact we would all do well to follow his outstanding example. i yield back to the gentlewoman. ms. delauro: i thank the gentleman from connecticut and yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. graves, for two minutes. without objection. mr. graves: thank you, mr. speaker. early reports indicate that president obama will call for a new spending package during his state of the union address tonight. i've heard as many of you that this might be masked as we would say or he might say tonight, targeted investment. more stimulus. democrats speak for stimulus but

it will be hidden with calls for spending cuts. mr. speaker, americans know our debt is $14 trillion, they know the president spent $1.3 trillion over the last budget year only to see unemployment stay above 9%. now is the time to pivot the fiscal responsibility. it's time to shred the president's maxed out credit cards and cut his weekly allowance. it's time to tell our kids and grandkids that we don't want them to bear the burden of our generation's fiscal irresponsibility. mr. speaker, i along with my constituents in north georgia hope that the early reports are wrong about another stimulus being proposed tonight. rather than use a few spending cuts as window dressing for more spending, tonight the president's opportunity to seize the moment and be a leader and get serious about spending reform. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from connecticut, mr. murphy, for five minutes. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise as did other members of the connecticut delegation to pay tribute to a great man who served with the state of connecticut and his community of danbury in a variety of ways, bill ratchford. he passed await recently and the entire state of connecticut is mourning but in particular my district is mourning. though connecticut districts have been reconfigured over the years we both share a love and affinity for bill's hometown of danyurry he represented in the united states congress and and i have the great fortune of reng. bill grew up in danbury, was a child of the depression, his father worked in one of the hat factories in danyur bii, his mother was a schoolteacher and instilled in bill the value of a good education, love for family and country. shortly after i was sworn into office bill came to see me. to share with me some of his

thoughts about what was important about being in this place. though he cared so passionately about issues as representative courtney and delauro mentioned especially for issues related to aging, the fact he became later on the state's first commissioner of aging, what he cared maybe most about was the discourse in this place. bill was a gentleman first, second, and third. he represented everything that people wanted government to be. that's what we talked about when he came into my office that day, how he knew the fight for what you cared about in this place but do it in a respectful way. i join with representative courtney in reminding everyone here there are certain giants of this place we can look to in trying to reorder the way in which we have conversations. and bill certainly was at the top of that list. his commitment to public service built a legacy that in danyurry and throughout connecticut we will remember for a long time. he will be terribly missed and in my thoughts and prayers and those of everyone in the danbury

area are with barbara and his family at this time. at this time i'd like to yield to representative hoyer for a moment. mr. hoyer: i thank congressman murphy for yielding and i want to join him in in the remarks he has made. i had the opportunity to attend a memorial service for my friend bill ranchford. bill and i first met in the early 1970's. he had been speaker of the connecticut house and was serving as president of the national conference on state legislatures. i was about to be president of the maryland senate and another former member, martin slaffo was the speaker of the minnesota house. the three of us became very good friends. later in the week the next week, we lost an extraordinary american, sargent shriver and i had the opportunity to speak at his wake last friday night. the reason i mentioned sargent shriver, bill ratchford and

sargent shriver were extraordinary public servants who believed that service to others was their most important role in life. in terms of their public service. privately they were both also representatives of extraordinary family leaders. revered by their families, and his sons, bill's sons and sarge's sons both spoke at their memorial services. sean, scott and brian spoke movingly of a father who was fully engaged and adored by his sons. and of course his wife barbara, a very close friend of mine for 40 years as was bill, was revered as a mother. so that these two families, two extraordinary leaders that we have lost recently, represented the best in america. bill ratchford was my friend. he brought honor on this

institution by his service. bill and i had the opportunity to serve on the appropriations tee committee together. which was arguably at that point in time the most bipartisan committee in the congress of the united states. i'm not sure that's still true but it certainly was then. and bill was respected on both sides of the aisle for his decency, his intelligent and commitment to making america a better country. so i'm pleased to join my friend chris murphy, who has been such a giant himself at a young age, but at age when bill ratchford was becoming a major leader in this country. so i thank him for yielding me this time. i thank bill ratchford and his family for what they have contributed to this country. we lament his loss, but we celebrate his life. which was an extraordinary life

well lived. and a blessing to all who knew him and to his country. and i yield back to my friend. mr. murphy: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from minnesota, mrs. bachmann, for two minutes. mrs. bachmann: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the opportunity to speak today. this evening we will hear from the president of the united states in his state of the union address and it's a privilege for the people of our country to be able to hear from our president what his remarks are about the state of our union. we look forward to hearing, mr. speaker, what the president's plan will be going forward to lift our country out of the high unemployment rates that we've been dealing with during these last 20 months. to have the unemployment rate in excess of 9% and in some cases over 10% has been unacceptable

and it's been a hardship for so many people in the nation. also, i am looking forward to finding out what the president's pro-job growth agenda will be going forward. we want to get unemployment rates back to much lower levels so that families and businesses can thrive again. also, mr. speaker, i'm looking to find out what will be the specific cuts that the president will be proposing. we haven't heard specific cuts so far. in fact, we've heard that the president may be referring to investments, meaning more spending yet again, spending that this country simply cannot afford. because as we know, mr. speaker, we are falling off the cliff in terms of debt increases and that is not good for the next generation of americans. second, i'm wondering what specific pieces of legislation that the president has proposed, would he be willing to repeal, we know for instance, the cap and trade proposal will be a job killer. we know that for the health care

law as well that it is in fact a job killer. finally, i'm wondering, mr. president, what areas of regulations the president would be willing to do away with. the president made a statement last week that he wants to direct all of the agencies to look for regulations that would kill jobs. we know that the e.p.a. regulations will in fact do that and we're wondering if perhaps the president would be willing to put those on the table and delay implementation of the cap and trade system through the eep. finally, mr. speaker, we also know with americans paying in excess of $3 a gallon in gasoline it may be wise to look at american energy production. what would those proposals be from the president, we look forward to hearing that this evening. mr. speaker, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair royces the gentleman from kentucky, mr. yarmuth, for five minutes. mr. mr. yarmuth: thank you, mr.

speaker. tonight the president of the united states will deliver the state of the union address as we all know and if the reports are accurate, what he will talk about today is the need to make serious investments in this country's future. now we've just heard from a colleague from the other side of the aisle and we've heard from many republicans over the last few days concerning the issue of spending and whether or not we need to be spending anymore money in this time of admittedly dire financial circumstances. you know, most families when they borrow money they do it for two reasons. either for survival, they need to eat, they need to feed their children, they need help for their family, they need to clothe them, or they borrow because they see an opportunity to invest and to make their lives better down the road. now, i know that many people don't think of government

spending as investment. but if we look back not too long, just over the recent history, the last few decades, we've seen numerous instances in which government investment has not only created jobs, it has spawned entirely new industries. as a matter of fact, even though people made fun of al gore many years ago the fact is that government investment actually created the internet. government investment through the defense department and other research institutions have created literally billions and billions of dollars in private sector growth. and created thousands and thousands and thousands of new jobs. we face a very difficult choice right now. we can sit back while the rest of the world advances or we can make the tough choices right now to make serious and important

investments that will not just create new industry but may in fact solve some of our most intractable problems. and i'm talking here about medical research, for one. we now invest $6 billion a year in cancer research. cancer treatment and the cost to society because of cancer amounts to literally hundreds of billions of dollars each year. it costs medicare, it costs medicaid, it costs the private system. if we spent $20 billion a year on medical research for cancer and over 10 years finally cured it, made it manageable in an inexpenseble way -- inexpensive way, the long-term payback for this country would be enormous. one of the problems with analyzing our health care reform proposal, now in the law, the affordable health care act, is

that we weren't able to factor in the long-term benefits of preventive care, research, more efficient operations, because they're not quantity fible. but we know that if we could just deal with two major diseases, diabetes and cancer, we would probably solve our long-term health care financial issues. so, tonight the president will lay out choices for us and i think this is a very, very important aspect of our public dialogue right now. we need to make sure that not only the american people but also every member of congress really understands what our choices are. because it's very easy to stand up and say, we're going to cut spending by $100 billion, the federal government, when you're not willing to talk about what specifically you're willing to cut. and my colleague from minnesota just said, the president may not be specific.

well, the fact is, republicans haven't been specific either. we need this laid out for the american people, we need it laid out for us. we have difficult choices, we need to make them. i think the president's on the right track. we cannot cut back right now on medical research. we cannot cut back on the type of research that will create new industries, particularly in the energy field. we cannot cut back right now on education when the rest of the world is passing us by in terms of the achievement of their students and we cannot cut back right now on investments in our infrastructure when much of it is crumbling around us. so, i look forward to the debate we're going to have over the next few months. it's an important debate. it's probably the most serious debate we've had in this country in decades. because we are at a crossroads. we can allow this country to become a secondary international power or we can maintain our

status as the world's -- not just the world's largest economy, but the world's most ingenious economy, the world's most innovative country and a society which cares about making life better for every american citizen. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from washington, mr. inslee. for five minutes. without objection. mr. inslee: mr. speaker, i came to the floor this morning to talk about our excitement hearing the president tonight express that feeling of optimism and confidence and can-do spirit that has always epitomized -- epitomized america and that is in the field of our clean energy job creation program. and i'm excited about it because as we're coming out of this very deep recession, many of us believe that one of the brightest spots on our economic horizon is our ability to

develop hundreds of thousands of new jobs in this country so that america can fulfill its destiny of leading the world in clean energy development. and we believe it is our destiny to do that because we have always done that throughout america's history, leading the world in aeronautics, leading the world in software, leading the world in air space, and now we have a great opportunity to lead the world in the development of clean energy and when we do that we do believe we will create hundreds of thousands of new jobs and i look forward to the president's ideas on how to do that. but i wanted to talk about where we are right now in our ability to do that. i remember i came to the floor two or three years ago and talked about the prospects of creating jobs in america and the creation of an electified transportation system and our ability to electrify our cars. and when i did that i remember i was criticized by some in this

chamber thinking, well, that was sort of a pipe dream, couldn't happen, that was buck rogers kind of stuff, it really wouldn't allow us to create jobs in this field. well i want to bring us back up to where we are now this year to see what progress we've made. i want to mention three pieces of progress we've made that are going to, i think, be examples a, b and c of why the president's message of clean energy will be received well tonight. number one, this year the general motors volt, a plug-in hybrid electric, the car that you can plug in and go 40 miles on all electricity, and then if you want to go more than 40 miles it's got an internal combustion engine that will generate electricity that will charge the battery that will run the wheels of the general motors volt. when i asked general motors to bring the volt to capitol hill a couple of years ago people thought, ah, interesting idea, it will never work. well, guess what? the general motors volt this

year was north american car of the year a couple of weeks ago, stunned the auto industry and is going to be one of the great leaders as we move to the electric cars of the future. we have the domestic manufacturer, the ford focus which think is going to -- we think is going to follow. we hope to see toyota and nissan produce electric cars here as well. these are the cars not of the future but of today. and we can lead the world in the manufacture if we do some of the things that the president will talk about tonight, to electrify our auto transportation fleet. second, i want to talk about one of the most exciting events i've ever had in the u.s. congress and that is last october i went to the wooden cross lutheran church in woodenville, washington. and i got to participate with that congregation in dedicating the very first electric charging station in america in a church parking lot.

and i thought, this is a great thing for america, that we are electryifying our transportation fleet, allowing americans a place to plug in their electric cars and we dedicated this charging station, it's about 3 1/2, four feet tall, you pull up to it, plug in your electric car in the church parking lot. i just sort of said, the good book says, let there be light. well, now let there be power. and there is power in this church parking lot and there's going to be more power in thousands of places in america because of our stimulus bill which allowed the creation of these electricic charging stations. third, i want to mention the production of batteries. you know, we have grown something like, and i want to make sure i get the number right, 700,000 clean energy jobs, doubling renewable energy manufacturing and generating jobs in america by the year 2012. and the clean energy sector has grown 2 1/2 times faster, faster, than the u.s. economy in

the last year and a half. and one of the reasons is because we are growing an electric battery manufacturing capacity industry here in the united states. we only had 2% of that capacity in 2009. we believe we can have 40% of the world's capacity by 2015 and if you want to think this is not a reality, go to holland, michigan, where because of the stimulus bill we passed last year, we're putting hundreds of formerly laid off auto workers to work in holland, michigan, making lithium eye on batteries to run our -- eye onbatteries to run our electric cars and that's happening because of what we did. i look forward to the president's speech tonight. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from texas, ms. jackson lee, for five minutes. ms. jackson lee: thank you very

much, mr. speaker. as i was walking through the hallway i encountered an individual who was enormously excited about the president's state of the union. they happened to be a new employee of this house this will be the very first time that they would have this privilege and this honor. i think it is important for us to recognize that it is a privilege and an honor. in essence it is a responsibility of this administration, of this president, to follow in the tradition and the law of the land, that the president presents to the congress, to the people of this great country, the state of the union. frankly i'm an optimist. i am so grateful that we live in a country that has a constitution that has prevailed for so many years, that we have language in our constitution

that says that we have organized to create a more perfect union, that the words of the declaration of independence are pressed upon our hearts, we hold these truths to be self-evident. that we all are created equal with certain inalienable rights. that's what i expect to hear from our president tonight. a man of passion and commitment and dedication, a man who feels the pain of this nation, a man who has sacrificed his own personal prestige and popularity in order to make very difficult decisions. the american recovery act, for example, that went into the nooks and crannies of this nation and built up small communities, provided extra police officers, provided more patient rooms, gave more resources to local hospitals and research institutions to make this country great. created jobs. and if you look at a grid that shows the job creation of the last administration, you'll see

that it is predominantly all red. jobs lost. but as we have struggled to build and climb, we are going in the right direction. and so i would ask the president to stand his ground on investment in america, infrastructure in america and i would say to this body that we must stand committed and dedicated to the protection of the vulnerable. does that mean increasing the deficit? no. i happen to have had the privilege of working on a balanced budget. it's exciting. we passed a balanced budget and out of that we created the children's health insurance program and 22 million jobs in the last democratic administration. we can do that now. we can create jobs and i would encourage the president to focus on the infrastructure. why? let me give you an example. the city of houston, now the third largest city in the united states, based upon the census

data that will be finalized coming in the month of february, we are in line at the -- after 30 years to create a world class mobility system. we've been granted we have been granted money, not wasting money, texas sends more to the united states tax coffers than we get back. we'll be creating 50,000 jobs by investing in a light rail system to move people forward, to eliminate the emissions crisis that we have, and to put people to work. the crisis that we're now in with not having passed the appropriations of the 111th congress which i secured some $150 million for to us start, stymied all of these need to build projects on bridges and freeways, on dams that need to be repaired, all of that creates the genius of america or boosts the genius of america and lets

us work. so mr. president, stand your ground on making sure that we move forward in infrastructure so that we can make it in america, meaning that americans can make it, they can survive, they can improve their quality of life and we can make it in america. i want us to build the light rail cars. bring it on home. let us build turbines that are part of wind energy. let us build the solar panels and yes, let us build our buses and trains. stand your ground, mr. president. and then for the most vulnerable of america, let's put it on the line that we are not going to touch social security. i know the panic that goes through senior citizens, the disabled, veterans who are dependent not only on the veterans compensation but dependent on social security. let's draw the line and to the young people of america, let's be very clear. you're not carrying the senior citizens, we're not taking out

of your future. remember the words of president kennedy who said ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country. social security is an investment in those who have worked and those who are disabled and so mr. president, stand your ground tonight in this most privileged opportunity to speak to the american people. bring us together as we will all be sitting with each other but let us stand ground for the future of america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentlelady yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until noon today. >> when the house returns they will pick up consideration on two bills and the resolution that sets non-security spending for the remainder of fiscal year 2011 to the 2008 levels or lower. we will have live house coverage

when they return. of course, 9:00, and the house chamber, the joint session, the state of the union. our coverage here at c-span gets underway at 8:00 p.m. eastern, with the preview program. the president's address at 9:00 and the republican response follows that, by house budget committee chairman paul ryan who we understand will deliver it from but budget committee hearing room. we will take your phone calls, you can participate on line at c-span.org and facebook.com/c- span. c-span2 will also broadcast the speech. live reactions from members of congress at statuary hall. but the preview program at 8:00 on c-span. coming up in about 25 minutes we will take you to a news briefing. bipartisan members will talk about the house seating arrangements tonight for the joint session for the state of the union. set to get underway at 11:00 eastern. until then, conversation from

this morning's "washington journal" with our guest, major garrett. host: we're back with major garrett. cheap white house correspondent for fox news. now congressional correspondent with national journal. here is his story this morning. what should be worse be looking for tonight? -- what should viewers be looking for tonight? guest: it will probably be the most watched speech that the country will see this year. this is his stage to reset the course of his administration and the way he talks about public policy and his agenda after the midterm elections in which democrats lost control of the house and up toward significant

losses in the united states senate. the president is clearly retooling his team and message and his agenda going forward. what people would hear tonight is the way the president tries to adapt to the new political reality. the underlying fact is he pass a tremendous amount of legislation with the 111th congress. some of which republicans would like to get rid of. the president will in no way give ground on that. even though much of the tone will be about reconciliation and moving forward and working together, the underlying reality is much of what the president accomplish he will defend and republicans will try to unravel and that will be a big part of the story after the state of the union. host: there are reports that he will move to the center in this speech. specifically what words should listen to that indicate he is moving to the center? guest: i hesitate always to try

to leave the witness. americans are enormously adept at deciding what the rhetoric is that they're looking for and whether or not any president hits the mark. i am reminded of a very long state of the union address that bill clinton gave that received almost universal criticism among their reporting class in washington. only to find out six months later the american people love that speech. host: are you talking about the 1995 speech? guest: it went on for at least an hour and a half. many people in washington thought it was far too detailed. if that it was a laundry list. that was excessive policies -- that it was excessive policy discussion. all of the wise men and women look down their nose at it. yet the american people to it.ed bearbervery favorably

so i am was hesitant to be the one to say look for this and that. the american people know what they want to hear and know what they're looking for. george bush could talk about reconciliation and 2007 and moving the country together, but we all knew the country was divided. iraq, afghanistan, his economic policies. you can say a lot of things and build as many floors and as you want, the but the american people are the ultimate ones that will decide. host: here is a little color for people -- here is a colorful message for people.

it took a host: how long is too long? guest: how long is too long? by any typical metric of the time, it was too long. i remember being a part of the pile on group. everyone was heaping criticism on top of the speech. yet the american people watch, listen, because they wanted to see how the president would respond to a moment after a defeat. one of the most important parts of being president is not always winning. one of the most important parts of the presidency is how you respond to defeat, how you respond to a setback, a national crisis, because everyone knows and america you will not always get what you want. but when you are the president

and you do not get what you want, you still have to leave. you have to either speaker how to change, adapt your political momentum. that is one thing people will pay closer attention to tonight than they did maybe last year. i would expect the ratings to be pretty high, and the american ofple want to stake stock the president. host: what are you hearing about who was riding the president's speech, how long it might be? guest: i do not normally cover the obama white house the president is always extremely involved in the development of big speeches.

the big speeches he edits by hand and sends back numerous drafts, works through them, not up until the last minute but closer to the last minute and some are comfortable with. he feels only -- he feels calm about the ability to say the words and say the words the way he wants to. what he focuses on is the exact wording. he is an accomplished writer. he knows how to turn a phrase. he takes the part of the speech development process very seriously. host: our coverage begins today. we will have live coverage tonight at 8:00 eastern time. we will begin with the pre- speech coverage taking your comments and calls. at 9:00 eastern time on c-span

and c-span to we will cover the president's address. also we will cover the republican response by paul ryan, republican of wisconsin. we will talk more about that as well. on c-span2 we will have live reaction from members of congress. the look on the republican line, the first phone call. go ahead. caller: i do not think this been -- the speech tonight means anything because he keeps saying he's going to be transparent and has not been transparent. he wants everyone to think he is moved to the center but he will stay to the left where he came from and where he is planning on staying. guest: that is a classic example of what i was talking about.

philip has not entirely made up his mind, but mostly made up his mind about this presidency. there is no way to look at the last few years and are regarded as a time of active government involvement in the economy and regulation. the president believes those things are necessary and staunchly defends them and has achieved more in two years than most presidents have in two years. nearly as much as lyndon johnson, it may be amaybe more. some americans have responded favorably to that. independents are not sure. and some have clearly pulled back. i would say those that are republicans, like philip, are skeptical of president obama coming in and that many of the worst fears have been realized. the look will not be persuaded by in a rhetorical ships to the center. some americans very well might

be. host: arizona, you're on the air. caller: i have to say it is time in.put single payer back en the president is doing an awesome job and needs credit, and we need to go further. put single payer back in. host: a linda, have you ever voted for a republican? we lost her. she was calling on the independent line, but universal coverage is something that liberal democrats talk a lot about. guest: if you look at the polling data on the question of repeal, there is a certain percentage somewhere around 30% of those that say they are dissatisfied with the law that

wanted to go further. not everyone that falls and the dissatisfied category wants it removed or shrunken. they want it expanded. they want a single payer. the president knows that. i will tell linda it is a legislative reality, house republicans are never going to propose, pass, or even consider for a moment single payer. democrats to not have the vote to pull that across the finish line in the se. . . . . . . . .d the term is a non-starter. host: what do democrats want to hear? guest: what the democrats want to hear and probably what they will hear is less about health care and much more about jobs. the democrats believe that is largely a settled issue. politically it is quite clearly settled law until republicans

are successful one way or another changing it. until that occurs, it is settled law. implement it, but do not spend a lot of time on health care. i predict the president will say you're taking your vote in law of the land and have fought and argued about this, i believe it is the right thing. but i would say if there is more than 10% of his speech devoted to health care i will be shocked. host: major garrett writes about health care on the republican side in the house. oscar, democra host: oscar, democratic line. richmond, virginia. you are on the air.

the present as a speech tonight, we should stop speculating what he's going to say, but the first realization that must be understood is that bin laden won the war. he and 21 other people destroyed america. the whole premise of what is happening now, he said he would destroy the capitalist system and expose the hypocrisy. he has done that. i give you the tea party. that is the whole problem we have to discuss tonight as far as the state of the union. we have to come to the other or in 2012 this whole game is over. host: you want to hear about national security? caller: absolutely. guest: part of the state of the american union is the defense posture. every president addresses it.

i would imagine that would be a significant part of the president's speech in that he will talk about what has happened in iraq. he will talk, i am sure, about the july deadline to brinwithdrw forces from afghanistan. he may not be specific about that, but will clearly address that. there is some that would like to hear him explain what is going on guantanamo. -- on with guantanamo. there is no resolution of that issue, and there's certainly no closure with the president. host: i wanted to show the front page of "the lost angeles times."

you have paul ryan giving the official response to republicans, but then you have michele bachman who has started caucus giving her own address. guest: michelle laughlin is a fascinating figure in american politics. -- michelle bachman. she had to spend $11.6 million to raise the 13 million, so many may be saying how you do that? you spend a lot of money on direct mail and odorless and a lot of money with people on the phone trying to raise money for you. she has a very high turn rate in other words. it is not as a people pour money into her campaign coffers, she has to pull it out of them. it is costly to do that.

by onemillion raised w member of the house gives her political heft but you cannot ignore. but she is not a fulcrum in the house republican conference. she just is not. she thought for a couple of weeks for running for the house congress chairmanship position. it was made clear that if she did, she would probably get less than 20% of the votes, so she quietly folded that tent. she is a visible figure, but not particularly a leader. she can set rhetorical boundaries but does not dry policy. the decision will be made by speaker banner, erick kanter, kevin mccarthy, paul ryan. -- speaker boehner. caller: i am 54 and have been a

registered republican all my life, but i did vote for obama in this last presidential election, so i can go either way. with respect to major garrett, i hope he is wrong, and i think the majority of the american public hope he is wrong in his analysis of how the state of the union speech is going to go where president obama is going to defend everything that the democrats have done and not give on anything and republicans are plan to argue that everything they have done so far is bad and why it needs to be changed. i think the midterm elections for the american public sick and tired of congress not doing anything. we want to see them do something. the last date of the unions we have seen we have voicing the republicans stand up and cheer

and sit down, and this democrats stand up depending on what point was being said. i think the american people want to see everyone stand up and support and talk about vigorous debate. our ideologies are totally different, but we want to see something done. host: we get your point. major? guest: on the biggest accomplishments of the last congress, 100 a love of 11th congress, the president is going to defend. he will not retreat on those issues. in two of those instances, house republicans have made it abundantly clear they want to stop the implementation of the law. we use over a year it's to try to accomplish that. that is a reality. there are many other americans

and especially the exit polling data that the message was not get along, the message was stop. many americans thought enough has been done in the past two years and wanted to take a break. they wanted to slow things down. the house republican majority has air brakes on what had been the trajectory of the obama presidency. i was all over the country with canada obama and i heard him say it once, i heard him say 1000 times, he would never under any circumstances extend the tax cuts for the wealthy. midterm elections, the reality is he has not the votes. the economy is still staggering. he makes a fundamental decision

that completely repudiates a campaign promise because of an election. that is air brakes and a new direction. that is what happens when people vote. this is not a universal truth, but a partial truth, people are probably sleeping in a bit. it is a day that works longer into the evening. there is legislative business on the floor today, so members will be getting ready for that. because we do not have a partisan alignment, the mix seating arrangement, there might be less competition for those seats along the aisle where the president comes in. members will start getting their five hours before the speech to park and hold the seat. that guarantees them national television time, but because there will be a lot of emphasis on crowd reaction shots of lawmaker sitting together in the ming going inco mangling a

partisan politicians, i think there will be a lot more cut shot. -- and the mingling and cominginling of partisan politicians, i think there will be a lot more cut shots. host: mark on the independent line. caller: you miss me on the last speaker, so i had to rearrange my questioning. as far as the state of the union goes, i would like to see him address and try to defend the health-care law. there is a whole lot that is wrong with it. i would also like to see him address the u.s. energy policy. coal and natural gas built this country, and we will need

it for the next 50 years, so why not go ahead and take the oil out of the ground and the coal out of the ground and gas out of the ground in become major exporters of this? the royalties they would get would make billions of dollars for this country if they would just addressed the energy problem. host: we will leave it there. major garrett. guest: the president is a staunch advocate of grain economy and green jobs. -- of a green economy in green jobs. it is investments and technological advancements and mechanical infrastructure to help green jobs and help the manufacture of either turbines or other solar panels or other devices that can be exported. one problem with that is that china is well ahead of us on

that score. before the president went to upstate new york, i saw there was a company that had been moving along very well on the green jobs front but then saw the cost rise and they moved the infecin tire factory to china. -- entire factory to china. that is a harsh reality of the dollars and cents of green technology. i am sure the president will address this. the president is not nearly as big a fan as oil exploration as he was before the gulf oil spill. host: if you are curious about it will state -- be sitting in the box with michelle obama. the white house put out a list

and it includes david hernandez -- the white house put out a list yesterday and it includes david hernandez and dr. peter reed, the director of the trauma center in arizona. mark kelly declined the invitation to stay in houston where gabrielle giffords is continuing with her care there. new york on the line. caller: the president completely avoided -- that is the major difference between him and roosevelt went to the slums with eleanor and reached out. we cannot go down our own road, the most direct route to the airport. he wavoided it.

the people that will pay for other people surgery, because now we have to buy a certain amount of insurance -- i am so sick about hearing about the emergency room. suv.subsidizing someone's he literally sped 120 miles per hour. he had to make a huge ring outside the city. none of my students said a word about the president being here. guest: two separate issues of course. the local reaction to a presidential visit. i have covered many. they're always destructive. -- disruptive. the picture was about the turbines and jeff and meimmelt. everything else was either third

or fourth in the pecking order. the president got what he wanted out of the pictures and the day of emphasizing jobs summit technology, and investment and growth. on health care, this will be a debate we will continue to have, because the reform measure passed by the house sits now in the senate. republicans will bring it up eventually. dick durbin conceded it will probably come up as an amendment. robin brings up an issue that lies at the heart of this health-care debate. what do americans value more? coverage or cost? if you value coverage, then you want everyone covered and you hope that lower cost. republicans say no, if you lower costs, over time you will decrease coverage. what are we prepared to live with and live without when it comes to insurance coverage? that is really at the heart of

the debate. host: 10 minutes left. george from richmond, virginia. caller: i listen to you every morning before i go to work and you have democrats and republicans on your program, and everyone criticizes the president and the deficit, but i have seen no one come up with the planned for how to get this economy moving on both sides. all they do is bicker back and forth. i would like to see the president make a statement to get programs going into the economy moving. host: he here is a headline about what the president will say on getting the economy going. the headline in the new york times -- guest: if you are republican, you might ask yourself why does the president pitch for infrastructure with the first

emulous? what was the son of an hundred $52 billion about -- what was the $752 billion about? the answer we got is the projects take too long to get off the ground. now the white house believes whatever time they take to get off the ground, they need to be funded. i have often felt the white house, regardless of what you thought about the underlying economics of the stimulus had a messaging problem in that the principal achievement of the stimulus was to rescue and prevent greater harm, but they never talked about it that way. they built up a higher degree of expectation and they certainly had bars in grasping the unemployment rate will go down, but it went nowhere near the original projections.

if they characterize it more as the rescue effort to save us from far worse conditions they might find themselves in a more politically advantageous position than they find themselves in now. host: the next two are about creating jobs. guest: that is certainly his characterization of that. republicans will decide what degree investment constitutes more spending of obama find that they are ready oppose or if they meeting of thee a mines. there will be a highway bill. we will have infrastructure spending, so the question is how much and where? the natural gasoline tax has not been increase in many years. it is falling behind. house republicans have made it clear they will not be in favor

of any tax increase of any kind, so that could be a point that is heavily debated and argued about. host: charleston, west virginia, on the independent line. caller: i have a couple of things i would like to ask about. host: can ask you to make it one because we're running out of time? caller: i will go to health care. i was going to last about epa and what they're doing to us and west virginia. i would like to ask about what he thinks about the individual mandate for buying insurance. i am 78-years-old, and i can barely afford to make my medical payment, but this tells me i have to buy insurance on top of that, i would like to know -- there is a $2,000 fine if you do not buy -- i would like to know

what they're want to do to me if i do not buy the thing? guest: my understanding of the law is yet nothing to worry about. you are covered by medicare, and it is your principal mechanism for obtaining health care coverage. you have the option, and you have always had the option of buying a supplementary insurance policy on top of medicare, but that is your choice. the individual mandate does not apply to those who are covered by medicare. inst: let's go to ron michigan. caller: i want to make a couple of quick remarks about what obama should say tonight. number one, i learned last night that the gun that was killed to shoot the congresswomen was o'cloca glock gun.

people from the company said on the board. he should talk about gun control. the next thing is the supreme court justice went to a private meeting with michelle bachman. nothing was said about that. i think that citizens united ruling is extremely important and that we -- the supreme court are not accountable to us people. do you remember the speech last year? thank god obama mention citizens united and the leader shook his head no. you can call her back if you disagree with me. host: we will leave it there.

there'll be a lot of eyes on which justice is show up in which do not. guest: will justice roberts be there? i have some but said they doubt it. if justice roberts the show up, he can do so with the knowledge that now democrats after having gone through the midterm elections have decided that they may in fact move toward some of the independent expenditures operations that were legalized and citizens united. they unilaterally disarm on that front because the democratic party took a stand that this is wrong, but now it appears it will be some what affirmative for the next election cycle that it will go down that road. justice roberts could sit there with assault satisfied look on his face. satisfied look- is f on his face.

i think you are right about gun- control. indications from the white house are the answer is no. robert gibbs has been very reluctant to describe anything that is under investigation, but many people will want to hear, especially members sitting with the first lady. there will be an atmospheric overhang of the entire state of the union dealing with that crime, dealing with that assault, and the president may or may not have a policy response. "the new york times" this morning. we know that justice coleco will not be there because he has a

longstanding agreement for speaking in hawaii. for we know that just as briar will not be there -- guest: justice breyer will be there. host: we have also heard -- jim crawford wrote a piece yesterday on cbs news saying it is a question or not whether justice kennedy shows up. guest: this meeting with michelle bachman is much less than it originally sounded. it was just about the constitution. all the members of congress said it was a nice way to hear from the supreme court justice to talk about the law and constitution. it did not have a political aspect to it at all, at least as we have learned from the members. host: robert burns writes about

it in "the washington post" calling it fascinating. new jersey, go ahead. caller: i will make it short. and we tighten our belts. we do very well. we take vitamin supplements and eat three meals a day. it does not seem like much, but sometimes we eat -- host: i am running out of time. i need you to get to your point. caller: we are making it. our blood types are clean. our bodies are clean. we a clean clothes and a clean apartment. we are making it in this society with our limited income. i advise the american people to

do the same, tighten their belts. host: since that was more of a comment and not a question, we will go to mary on the democratic line. go ahead. caller: my question is there is always a shutdown when somebody mentions -- host: what you mean by that? -- what do you mean by that? 40% of us who do not have health insurance and will not be able to get anything. i am 57 it will not be able to afford health insuranceright noe clinics. i even got a hysterectomy through free catholic charities. we need a public option. host: we will leave it there. guest: the public option will continue to be a part of this

debate, specifically as the law is implemented, all the way to 2017. when i said the public option is not viable now, i just met democrats in the senate to not have the votes for it and not actively looking for them and house republicans are actively opposed to it. if you have one side of the capital in the hands of the democrats and not actively seeking to work on the issue and the opposition party diametrically opposed, you are simply not getting movement on that issue. as the president that a health- care law is implemented and the degree it works or does not work or satisfies or dissatisfies, there will be continued debate from those who say, look, we told you from the beginning, single payer pubublic option is >> we take you live now to capitol hill.

senators are talking about the seating arrangements for tonight's state of the union address. live on c-span. >> i note the spirit that north carolinian spring, so we are proud to stand here to answer questions after we give some brief remarks of what i think will be an historic night. the state of the union address was first broadcast on radio and on tv in 1947. president johnson first gave his speech at night in the 1960's. we believe that the custom of sitting in the two parties with the isle separating was probably started at guard around the time of the first broadcast in 1911. we are thrilled that 55 colleagues have joined us on our

letter. we believe there will be many more that will bridge the divide. we believe the state of the union has become more like a high-school pep rally. we want to change the tone and should the public that we can work together. i am an old mountain near. i think that the aisle that divides us has become as high as a mountain. it is time to climb that mountain. in colorado, we have literally a continental divide, and most of hectoliters bridge that divide. that is what we want to do tonight -- and most of us want to bridge that divide it. i would bet that these three colleagues standing behind me in their own professional and a lack of leadership positions in the past have found ways to step across that divide. i certainly did that in the

colorado state house. there were a lot of ways that the structure promoted working together. how can we faced a real challenge is that the country has? how are we going to pay down the debt? or develop a 24 sentry energy policy? -- a 21st century energy policy? we can continue to build on this symbolic gesture by emphasizing unity over division. i know that and have any real effect on the way we work together. stay tuned. we are going to propose some additional ideas with how we can work in a bipartisan fashion. i am honored to stand here with my three colleagues. i want to turn the podium over to my good friend from the far west. >> thank you.

the senator has mentioned that this is a symbolic gesture, and some might say why do you need to focus on the symbolism of it? it is a symbolic gesture. but why not start with a symbolic gesture? why not start of this new congress with a gesture, an effort to try to come together? if even just for a couple of hours as we showed not only respect for the elected leader of our nation when he comes to address us, but respect to the institution. as the senator has mentioned, oftentimes, at the state of the union address, it becomes more a situation where the attention is not focused on the president's words, but who is standing up or sitting down with arms across their chest. who is engaged in in the

theatrics. that is not what the state of the union address should be about. so let's come together for an hour or two, and if for nothing else, sit together with a colleague that perhaps we do not know as well and be part of a process that i think is good for all of us. when the senator first mentioned this to me, i thought, boy, this is a symbolic act. why would want to participate in doing this? i bounced it off of a couple of others. to be honest with you, they or all folks that have been around for a while. out at the front desk, i had a couple of young people that are pretty brand-new to capitol hill. there was a former intern of mine who is attending college at

the university of alaska. i said what do you think about this? what we do think if we were to come out and mix it up a little bit? instantly, the response was yes. one of them said that would be wild. i said, wild in a good way? and without question, yes, you should do this. maybe we need to get out of our conventional skins every now and then and come out and do something that indicates to the rest of the country that we are not afraid to sit next to one another. together, we can join together in this very important speech that the president will deliver to us tonight. i am pleased to be with the gentleman and all the others that will be joining us tonight. >> thank you. what an incredible leadership we have in the senate, both lisa

and mark have done an incredible job. the mark reached out to house members and asked for us to consider sitting with a colleague across the aisle. usually that is pretty easy for us because we do that quite frequently. in the state of the union, when not only is america watching, but the whole world is watching, how we conduct ourselves and what this institution is about -- this is my fifth year. when of the most discouraging things that i was able to recognize in the first four years is the partisanship. it is an us versus them approach. i have said this before. it is time that the congress, together, as one, becomes a team. in order for our country to move

forward. we have to unite together. it's far too often happens just after a tragedy -- just after 9/11 -- i was not here but i heard and watched how members of congress stood on the capitol steps and sang "god bless america." after this horrible tragedy in arizona, one of my blue dog classmates at gabrielle giffords. this need to be a constant reminder to all of us. that put the political rhetoric aside. understand that the entertainment news is there for one reason, for ratings. the most important thing we can do is be americans, unite together to move our country forward. that is what we have to do to have progress in this country.

we can remain on top. we can't have a divided congress or a divided nation in order for us to continue with the progress that the united states has been so strong and economically and has been the economic giant of this world. the world is watching tonight, and they also will watch how we conduct business going forward. at this time, i will have my colleague paul come forward and give his remarks. the great think he will be able to see tonight is unity in his first hit of the union. thank you. >> thank you, senators, and rep, for leading the way on this effort. i am proud to stand with you today. i am here because i believe it is time to work together to solve the problems at hand. you all came to congress with the same goal, to represent the

people we serve and continue to ensure that future generations would have the same opportunities that all of us had. we can disagree respectively and work hand in hand to find the best solutions to the problems we face in this country. sitting together this evening is a step in the right direction. we can continue to work in a bipartisan manner so that we can best gather everyone's ideas and put the best solutions forward. tonight, i will be sitting with representatives and leisure comings and the joining the rest of the arizona delegation in honoring dicaprio kit for it. i am excited about those it joining us in that effort -- rest of the arizona delegation in honoring gabrielle giffords. >> i know we would be happy to answer any and all questions. yes? >> if someone were to go back

and reviewed c-span video of last year's state of the union address, would they see you standing and cheering when president obama made his unprecedented attack on the supreme court justice for their decision? >> i don't know. i do not remember. i did have some concerns about that case. that is a whole other topic. but we are turning the page. this is a reset. we are going to -- those of us here and many others want to reset the way we work together partisanship at its best is about promoting ideas. partisanship for its own sake has been detrimental and not constructive. as we all believe, and that think three of my colleagues would agree, what happened in the tucson was a wake-up call.

we all quietly sent to each other republicans, democrats. the rhetoric is getting out of control. it can have an effect. sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can do real damage. we are committed to having the kind of debates around here where you can disagree without being disagreeable. >> to what extent do you think the media is responsible for this corrosive partisanship? which areas do you think are the most responsible? >> when public figures used words that may incite -- incite is probably a more flat or words then i would like to use.

if we do not use our words carefully, and the media chooses to build them up and passed them around in a way individually, i do not think that helps. you have a situation where as a leader, we all have an obligation to be careful with our words. listen to the senator's maxim in terms of sticks and stones can break your bones but it is the word that really hurt. the media doesn't share some of the blame to further that tension that is caused by those words. i think there is a responsibility for all of us. we need to be careful with what we say, and the media has to be careful in the way it chooses to portray a further. >it is far more interesting to

focus on some of the partisan and, rather than those efforts that demonstrate that we really are working together. i will use what said the senator and i have managed to build over the past couple of years as we have worked together as a chairman and working member. we worked to build some pretty good policy. yet in that does not generate near the same level of interest as a chairman and ranking member that do not seem to get on quite well. what is the story there? there is tension, partisanship, a difference in issues. it should not -- should the story not be individuals can come together to build good policy? i don't think we see enough good news stories that come out of the working relationship that we all work very hard to build.

>> can you give a sense of what your expectations are going forward in what behavior in the state of the union should be for members? does the president told some kind of responsibility? -- does the president hold some kind of responsibility? how should members behaved and does the president holds, accountability? >> i do not have been masters seating chart. this has been very organic. we would make a statement with our own behavior and actions. and i think that is where it starts and ends. i think that is what the caller is.alle

if we are sitting together, mixing black homeland security committee does -- mixing like the homeland security committee does, that lends to the sense that we are working together. the president tonight has the responsibility for the tone that will be set. maybe those remarks of the supreme court justice or not appropriate, but the ideas to move forward and build on relationships -- >> presumably, when the president says is something that the democrats alike tonight, they will be standing and cheering. republicans will likely sit quietly, whatever they choose to do. or do you have a different expectation? do you think people will behave differently? >> i think you will see a mix.

i do not have any set expectation of the behavior of my colleagues. i think you will see more standing ovations that include the whole chamber, because sitting together, these are ideas that the president is presenting that have utility for the country. >> members of congress will watch their own leadership to see if they should stand or not. i think this is a perfect example of what leadership should be about. far too often, you see members of congress trying to get their oscar awards. i don't think any member yet has received their oscar awards from c-span. until we get to the point that we lead as one, one congress and one nation, it is going to take time. it is not going to happen today. it is going to be day after day after day.

buying will stay off c-span unless it is very important because there is too much rhetoric going on. we too much rhetoric going on let's conduct our business the way it should be. we can lead by example, not just by standing up and giving a speech that hopefully someday gives someone and oscar. >> i would like to comment. the true meaning of it when you stand for an important point -- i think we have gotten to the point where we exemplified everything that is said in the speech. the american people want to have some concise language. maybe we will have less standing ovation. >> i think the american public said focus on the economy, focus on reducing the country's debt,

and work together. that is what i think they were saying. >> did speaker john boehner instruct your conference on how to behave tonight? did he give you any instructions? and maybe for all of you, congressman bachman is going to be giving the tea party response, which i think we can guess will be quite bipartisan. >> first of all, no special instructions. we have always been believing that is about personal responsibility and you best be on your best behavior. i think that is what the american public has asked us to do. >> it is a free country and a free congress. >> you and other senators have been working on a filibuster reform package. will the filibuster and not be

rolled back as far? i put that question to senator murkowski as well. >> yes. >> as i mentioned, i think all of us believe that this is a good first step. i think it is important when you use the word commentating. it is important to emphasize correctly the word that we are speaking about. it is not comedy. >> there is some general support for ending the practice of secret holds. i think there is a general sense that we ought to expedite nominations. and i know the minority -- there

is a case to be made about the under review. i have a set of proposals that i think would meet some of the concerns of the minority. we hope it will ripple through the way we do business. >> can you point to any concrete moments or actions that will come out of this? should this go out to the chamber on a regular, daily basis? should the seating arrangement be changed? >> i think they have instituted something that works well with their committee. we should have a chance to rub shoulders. what we are trying to do is not go back to the accrued old days -- but when there was more time

to interact personally. the good news is if you can get home quicker and be available to your constituents. that demand often means we do not have a chance to get to know each other personally. i think what we see this doing as a planning a way in our very compressed workweeks to get to know each other a little bit better and work together better. it works in small communities and in families. that is the intent here. america is one big family. unlike other families, there are times when people want to discount or it disenfranchises members of the family. we cannot afford to do that. we are all in this one big family. all of our prospects are linked. we have to do a better job of being a family. >> can you clarify how many members you think are going to be participating tonight?

>> i think you are going to see tens of additional members team up quietly and in some cases publicly. >> i have called around this morning and there were many folks in the house gym this morning. i think you are seeing that threw out the entire house side. i am trying to figure out how i can get closer to the front. >> for example, the colorado delegation will be sitting together, including senator bennett. stay tuned for who i will sit with. i think you will see the chamber configured very differently. >> this is an example of one step toward unity of the congress.

so much of that is going to have to start with the president. it is going to have to filtrate through the congress, but it will also be up to the leadership on both sides and in both chambers. the whole thing about power and control should not be the focus as opposed to the american people and moving our country forward. we have to get to the point that the rhetoric is about the progress of this country. >> i do hope that you all, as those that are covering the president's comments, do not spend the whole evening focusing on who is sitting next to who. it is like going to the prom and worrying about who is wearing what dress. it has been a little bit of a dating show. it reminds me a little bit of eighth grade. we will see how that works out. i do hope that it is not so

much a focus on who is sitting next to who. but really allowing those of us that are in the chambers and are focused on the president's words as we should be. it should be the content of the speech and not necessarily where everyone ends up sitting. hopefully, that will be the general outcome. >> let's ended on that note. thank you, all. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> you may have heard the senator mentioned the supreme court. the associated press reports that chief john roberts will lead a contingent of six supreme court justices to the state of the union tonight. we are just about 25 minutes away from the u.s. house gaveling in for a couple of suspension of bills. at the main item on the agenda is a resolution that sets nonsecure the spending at 2008 levels or lower. one hour of general debate. they are set back to come in at noon eastern. we will have live coverage on c-

span. we will also have live coverage of the state of the union address. one more item to tell you about concerning the budget report. erick kanter has said the house will hold an early vote on feb. on the continuing resolution. that vote is now scheduled for february 14. coming up at noon, we will hear from the u.s. house and their debate on the resolution. we are going to show you some of the debate from last night. mpore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one hour. mr. dreier: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield 30 minutes to my good friend from worcester. all time yielded will be for debate purposes only and peppeding that, i yield myself suchime as i might consume and ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, runaway federal spending is one of the most significant issues that this congress is facing. our national debt has implications for nearly every major challenge that we must confront. it's tied to our economic recovery. it's tied to our national security. it's tied to our ability to delir on our constitutional mandate for transparent, limited and responsive government. the time to exercise our power of the purse with discipline and restraint is long overdue. the time for us to exercise our power of the purse restraint is long, long overdue. we must return to pre-bailout, pre-binge spending levels for funding the federal government. we know that a great deal of hard work and tough decisions lie ahead for every single member of this institution.

we know that a great deal of hard work is there and we're going to face some very difficult, tough, tough decisions. there are going to be difficult decisions, but, mr. speaker, they are decisions we are going to have to make. first and foremost, we must get our economy growing and our work force expanding again. strong growth and job creation will increase tax revenues and provide greater resources that are needed. but, mr. speaker, that's only half of the equation. economic growth is critically important. we need to do it so we can enhance the flow of revenues to deal with owes essential items that are there, but it is half the equation. we can't get back on to a firm ground with sound fiscal standing unless we have a leaner

federal budget. some of this can be accomplished by eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. everybody is always in favor of eliminating waste, fraud and abuse. and what's the best way to do that? robust oversight. robust oversight will allow us to streamline federal spending and make better use of taxpayer dollars. but we have to acknowledge up front that hard work and painful cuts lie ahead. we know this isn't going to be an easy task but it is absolutely essential. just as families and small businesses across this country have been forced to cut back during these difficult economic times, weere in this institution are going to have to do the same, and that's the message we got last november that brought people like my rules committee colleague, mr. scott, who is sitting here next to me on the floor, that's the message. some federal programs, some

federal programs, mr. speaker, are wasteful, and deserve to be cut. there will be others that have merit that which we simply cannot afford at the current levels. we have to be honest about that. we have to engage in a responsible debate about what our priorities must be. what we cannot do is allow this debate to degenerate into false accusations about the other side's intentions and let me repeat that, mr. speaker. we cannot let the kind of free-flowing rigorous debate we need to have to generate into these accusations that we so often seem to hear around here. there is no one in this body who wants gut -- there is no one in this body that wants to gut funding for key essential programs, like veterans' programs or like education,

child nutrition. no one wants to gut these programs. so i think it's important for us to state that. and there is n evidence that any proposal out there would undermine things like support for our nation's veterans. we are all entering into this debate with good faith, good intentions and a commitment to response by address the need to implement fiscal discipline. we will have to make hard choices, but that process will not be served by unfair or disingenuous accusations. we also recognize that this will be a lengthy process. we are just beginning what is going to be a two-year process focused on this. today's underlying resolution, the measure we will considering through this rule and then on the floor tomorrow, is merely the first step in this ongoing fort to bring our

federal budget back into the black. our committees will have to conduct extensive oversight, as i mentioned earlier, of federal programs. we will have to dispense with fiscal year 2011 spending, which the last congress failed to do before we can even begin to deal with the coming fiscal year. the underlying resolution that we have before us today lays down a marr for reducing spending and puts the house on record for its commitment to tackle this issue in a serious way, the hard work will follow. as this process proceeds, rank and file members of both litical parties, democrats and repuicans alike, will have the opportunity to participate in our effort to addresshese very tough decisio. through constructive debate, we can finally begin to impose real accountability and discipline in our federal budget. concert with pro-growth

policies, and i said, to me, the most essential thing is implementing pro-growth economic policies, but going hand and hand with thinks pro-growth policies, this effort will put us back on the path of economic recovery and jobreation. today's rule sets the stage for the start of that effort. i'm going to urge my colleagues to support this rule and demonstrate their resolve to tackle runaway federal spending in a serious way. and with that, i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the geleman from california reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i thank the chairman for yielding to me the customary 30 minutes and i yield myself such time as i may consum the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: i rise in strong opposition to is closed rule, so much for an open process and so much for a free flow of ideas. i rise in strong opposition to

the underlying resolution. once again, the republican majority is choosing to ignore the single most important issue facing the american pele, jobs. my republican friends have brought forth a resolution that they tout as a spending reduction measure. in fact, the resolutiondoesn't cut a single dollar, not one dime from the federal budget. if this were a good-faith effort, there would be some numbers in this resolution. instead the resolution, and i quote, assume nonsecurity spending at fiscal year 2008 levels, unquote without specifying exactly what those levelsight be. in other words, mr. speaker, this is a budget resolution without any numbers, which is why it is meaningless. we are told that the numbers are on their way, that the congressional budget office will tell us on wednesday of this week, what the impact of this resolution would be if it were

actually put into place. so why are we are here today debating this issue? why can't we wait until wednesday we have the numbers? the answer is is as plain on the calendar on the wall, politics, pure and simple. the republican leadership has scheduled a vote before president obama addresses the nation in his state of the union address, that way they will have a fresh set of lking points. and say look how serious we are about cutting government funding, when they haven't cut anything. another problem with the resolution, it reinforces a terrible precedent that they established in their rules package. under those rules, a sine member of congress, the chairman of the budget committee, has the authority to determine spending levels for the government for the rest of the year. now, like all of my colleagues, i have a great deal of respect

for mr. ryan, but i strongly disagree with the notion that he and only he should determine something is fundamental as the budget of the united states. mr. speaker, we have to vote in this house to change the name of a post office, but we can't have a vote on how much we spend on education, on food safety, on infrastructure, on environmental cleanup or medical research? that's a far cry from the openness and transparency that my republican friends promised. last week in the rules committee, i offered an amendment to this resolution that would have lowed the other 435 members of the house the opportunity to vote on this critical issue, but my republican colleagues defeated my amendment on a party-line vote. finally, mr. speaker, the resolution walls off defense spending from the budget act. we hear all the time from my friends on the other side of the aisle that everything should be on the table. why, then, would they take hundreds of billions of dollars in potential savings off the

table right out of the gate? even speaker boehner said, and i quote, i believe there is room to find savings in the department of defense, end quote. if that's true and it most certainly is, why did this relution treat this as untouchable. when it comes to the federal budget, the republican majority is not off to a good start. the rules package paved the way for them to add $5 trilliono the deficit and they voted to repeal the health care law and ood to the deficit and now they are rushing a one-page bill without a single number or any specifics about how and where they want to cut. what we are doing today, mr. speaker, is not real. there are no tough choices being made today. this is show business, and quite frankly, it diminishes the legislative process. the american people deserve much, much better, and i urge my colleagues to reject this closed rule and i urge them to reject

the underlying bill. and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. dreier: i'm happy to yield twminutes to one of our new members who i mentioned in my opening remarks, the gentleman from from north charleston, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. dreier: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days torevise and extend their remarks on this rule we are considering. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. . the gentleman from south carolina is recognized. mr. scott: thank you, mr. chairman. as a business owner who has only been in congress for 19 days, if we want more jobs in our economy, we musbe serious about spending cuts. spending in washington is burdening future generations. unborn americans, unborn americans will have to pay for

the benefits that we ascribe to ourselves. in the previous two years, congress has added nearly $3.3 trillion to the national debt. is it any wonder, then, that during the same time period, our unemployment rate has skyrocket frd 7.8% to 9.4%? it's not. as a small business owner, i don't have to pay higher taxes, i'm able to hire more people. when i don't pay higher taxes, i can invest in more equipment and more services. every dollar taken by me from the government means i have to go out and earn two more dollars just to break even. that's why i offered the amendment in the rules committee for spending even less, even less than the 2008 levels. 2008 levels is just a start. and we need to go much deeper than that. i support this rule.

thankou, mr. chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, let me acknowledge the presence of my new colleague on the rules committee, if this was a serious effort, there would be numbers. there are none. this is about issuing a press release -- mr. dreier: will the gentleman yield? mr. mcgovern: i will not. this is about issuing a press release after the state of the union so they can have a talking point to go home with. this isn't a serious effort. if it was, there would be numbers in there. mr. dreier: would the gentleman yield for 30 seconds? mr. mcgovern: i yield to the the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen. the speaker pro tempore: how much time? mr. mcgovern: three minutes.

mr. van hollen: i thank my colleague, here we go again. if this were a serious proposal on the budget, you would have a budget number in this document. there is no number in this document. . on opening day our republican colleagues wrote a measure that gutted the pay-as-you-go rule that we have in this body and did an end run around the pay-as-you-go law. a few days later we figured out why they did that. because they added $230 billion to the deficit over 10 years and $1.4 trillion over 20 years. those aren't my numbers, those are the numbers of the independent, nonpartisan congressional budget office with respect to the impact of their effort to repeal health care reform instead of doing what we should be doing which is focusing on jobs.

that measure on opening daalso did another thing. it gave the chairman of the budget committee unprecedented power to unilaterally pick the budget ceilings, the spending ceilingses, for this entire congress. no input from anybody else, no debate, no vote. so all of us thought when this new measure was coming up, maybe now we're going to have some accountability. maybe this body will have an opportunity to vote on the very important spending ceilings for the united states congress and for the government. but lo and behold when you look at the resolution there's no number. where's the beef? and i have to say to my colleagues that, if you want transparency why are you hiding the ball? is the number going to be $100 billion? is it going to be $80 billion? $60 billion? we hear all different numbers in the press out there and they haven't put it in the measure.

instead they've said once again, we're going to allow the chairman of the budget committee to decide. i have great respect f the chairman of the budget committee but none of us should be contracting out our votes and our responsibilities to another meer of congress. we shouldn't ever do that. certainly we shouldn't be doing that on something as important as setting the overall budget and spendi ceilings for the united states government. that's irresponsible and yet that's what this rule will ask every member to do. contract out his or her vote to one person. so why are we doing this? why are we bringing a budget resolution to the floor with no number? as my colleagues said, timing is everything here. this is an opportunity to have a press release tomorrow, the day the president's going to deliver the state of the union address, to create the illusion that they're making progress on the budget number. without a number. now, we heard from our colleagues on the republican side, well, you know what?

we have to wait for the congressional budget office to tell us what their projections are so we can figure out the magnitude of the reductions. i ask for an aitional minute. mr. mcgovern: i yield the gentleman an additional one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional one minute. mr. van hollen: we asked them, why don't we he the number? they said, well, we got to wait for c.b.o. we're pleased to hr the new found respect for the c.b.o. numbers, but here's my point. that's going to happen within 24 hours of tomorrow. 24 hours. we could have a budget resolution with the beef, with the numbers so everyone could decide what the ceilings are going to be. no. we got to do it tomorrow. why? state of the union address, great press release. now, i've heard my colleagues say they've got to do this because there was nothing in place in the house from a budget perspective. well in fact the house last year passed a budget enforcement act. i got it right here. it's got a number in it. it's got a number. like these budt documents have

. mr. dreier: will the gentleman yield on that point? mr. van hollen: i'd be happy to yield -- mr. dreier: i'm happy yield the gentleman time. mr. van hollen: certainly. mr. dreier: what was the vote in the house onhat budget that my friend was just talking about? mr. van hollen: i don't remember the exact vote but it passed, mr. chairman. it was deemed, there was never a vote in this institution -- mr. dreier: i thank my friend for yielding. mr. van hollen: there was a vote on the resolution in the house. if you want to talk about deeming, whoa, whoa, whoa, this is -- that 30 seconds came from the chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. van hollen: i ask reckons because he yielded to me. i took three seconds and he yielded me 30. i thank you, mr. chairman. deeming. what we're doing today is the ultimate example of deeming. we are passing a resolution that deems in advance the passage of a number that we don't even know and it's going to be decided by one person. we are deeming that individual

all the authority and the shame of it is that that's a process that i think we all recognize as flawed and yet this is deeming on steroids. so i would suggest that we come up with a real numr, put some beef on this, have a real argument and let every member vote and take responsibility. i thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: thank you very much, mr. speaker. let me say that i think that one of the thicks that we have to -- things that we have to recognize here, and i'm happy to engage in rigorous debate and i'm happy that we haveot at this point had any of our friends on the other side of the aisltalk about the prospect of starving children, throwing people out of schools, dedrivinging -- depriving veterans of acce to ththings that theyeed. and so i express my appreciation to my colleagues because up in the rules committee that was the tenor of the discussion that took pla upstairs. one thing that i want to say,

mr. speaker, is that in 1974 the congress put into place, known as the -- legislation known as the 1974 budget and empowerment act. i happen to believe that that needs to be overhauled because democrats and republicans alike recognize that the 1974 budt >> some of last night's debate on the resolution cutting and non-security spending 2 fiscal year 2008 levels or lower, the debate on that is coming out. also, two suspension of bills are on the agenda. later tonight, the state of the union address is at 9:00. now, live house coverage here on c-span.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain. kava-kava open chaplain coughlin: proclaim a fact. through the medium of television enter in and he ready yourself to listen, america. lord god, today this house chamber and its members preparing this place and this nation to welcome president barack obama tonight to listen to his state of the union. guide and protect him, lord, grant him health, wisdom, prudence. help all americans, lord, for we, the people of the united states, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, ensure domestic

tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty do assemble and ready ourselves to hear the president's message and act according to the constitution that holds us together as a new order both now and for ages to come. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the proceedings of the house. according to, the journal stands approved. the pledge will be led by our colleague from texas, mr. poe. mr. poe: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> by direction of the democratic caucus i offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: resolved that the following members are hereby elected -- >> i ask unanimous consent that the resolution be considered as read and printed in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. without objection, the resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is laid on table. the chair will entertain 15 one-minute requests on each side. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? without objection.

mr. poe: the government is going broke. it spends too much, it borrows too much, taxes too much. one idea is to raise the credit cardly. like when i would kids went to college. when they reached the max on their credit cards, the companies would raise their limits. they could spend more money by borrowing more money. however they all found out how difficult it was to get out of debt until they quit spending more. instead of more u.s. debt why not cut spending? start with foreign aid. there are 194 countries in the world and the united states gives to over 150 of them. did you know we give money to the dictator chavez of venezuela, the tyrant of south america? did you know we give money to russia and the zinger of all, we give money to china. yes, the country that owns most of our debt gets foreign aid. this absurdity must cease. no more foreign aid to

venezuela, russia, or china. and that's just the way it is. the speaker: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? without objection. >> tonight the state of the nation address is vitally important. president obama lay out a strategy. the economy is improving. with more than one million private sector jobs created last year. mr. baca: more people are going back to work but far too many americans find themselves without jobs. especially in my district in the inland empire where the unemployment is 14%. at this time, enormous challenges, we must all recognize that the problems we face cannot be solved by democrats and republicans solutions alone. only, i state only by working together, finding a common ground will we overcome the obstacles in front of us.

i stand ready to work with all of my colleagues, republicans, tea party included, to think outside the box and create a better future for our children and our country. as we prepare for the president's address tonight, i ask my friends on the other side ofthe aisle, are you ready to work with us to move forward? i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker: for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise andextend my remarks. the speaker: without objection. mr. pence: thank you, mr. speaker. tonight the president of the united states will appear in this chamber as nearly every president has for more than 150 years and report on the state of the union and we will receive him with the respect that is due his office. we are told in press reports that the president will focus on the future, on winning the future. but as the president said last friday and i quote, the past two

years were about pulling our economy back from the brink, close quote. and we expect to hear the same theme today. but frankly as most americans know during the last two years, this administration and the former majority in congress met our present cries twice an avalanche of borrowing and spending and bailouts and taxes and takeovers and mandates, far from pulling our economy back the weight of debt and taxes and regulations have stifled our economic recovery. mr. president, we will not win the future with the failed economic policies of the past. as you come into this hallowed chamber tonight, we urge you, mr. president, not just a new feature speevep. give the american people a new direction. the speaker pro tempore: members are advised to direct their comments to the chair. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island rise? without objection. >> i rise with serious concerns

about the misguided agenda our friends on the other side ofthe aisle are pursuing. while democrats continue to make job creation, economic recovery and debt reduction top priorities the majority continues to engage in political theater. in fact their first actions after assuming control of the house hasn't created a single job or president-elect prokted a single american business. mr. ciciline: the top priority has been to repeal the health care reform bill. and their so-called budget reform resolution they offer today is a one paige document with no specific spending, no budget numbers and most importantly, no ideas on job creation or on economic recovery. mr. speaker, we were sent here to create jobs and the get the american economy back on track. both republicans and democrats. let's stop the political gimmickry and get to the work of putting the american people back to work. i yield back the balance of my time the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania

rise? without objection. >> mr. speaker, as we look forward to tonight's state of the union address it's important for all of to us keep in mind the most important issues to the american people. jobs, the economy, and deficit reduction. in the weeks and months ahead we look forward to working together, democrats and republicans to focus our legislative attention on these issues. mr. altmire: as we debate these issues it's easy to simply identify the problem. we all know that unemployment is too high. the recovery is not as fast as we would like. and the deficit is out of control. but the time for simply defining the problem has long since passed and realistic solutions are long overdue. as we near completion of our first month of the new congress, the american people are still waiting to hear the majority's specific recommendations on how to address these issues. tonight we will hear from the president. i look forward to soon hearing

from the majority some specific details about their deficit reduction plans, not just ambiguous goals. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida -- forge florida rise? without objection. >> madam speaker, i rise today to honor the sacrifice of two st. petersburg, florida police officers who were killed in the line of duty yesterday. sergeant tom batinger and jeffrey swift were following up on a task force warrant when they and a deputy u.s. marshal were ambushed and shot. one officer was fatally shot trying to arrest the dangerous fugitive. officer batinger was shot attempting to rescue his colleague. officer yazlowitz was a canine

officer. he is survived by his wife lower rain. as my colleague congressman bill young stated yesterday from this floor, we pray for their families. ms. castor: we pray for their families, the police chief, chuck harmon and honor the sacrifice of our community heroes and all who wear the uniform of service. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington rise? without objection. mr. mcdermott: i want to give my folks a preview of tonight's off-broadway performance that will follow the state of the union address. the stage will be the house budget committee. the actor in a one-man show will be paul ryan of wisconsin.

and the script will begin with something like hello, i'm representative paul ryan and i'm speaking to you from the very location of the democratic job-killing spending binge unfolded during the last two years. unfortunately, the script for tonight's performance will not include the fact that democratic investments have created more jobs during the last two years than were created during the entire eight years of george bush. you also won't hear about the one thing that republicans fought tooth and nail for during the last two years, an extension of budget-busting $700 billion tax break for wealthy americans. coming attractions? the chairman will have another show the next week where he pulls the a budget number from a hat, filled with rabbits. that will be your budget number. enjoy the show. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise?

>> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without obct >> i rise to discuss the importance of reducing the influence of corporate special interest money in our elections. corporations and other special interests are free to pump unlimited sums of money into campaign attacks and worse yet, because of this decision, there's no good mechanism to keep home from foreign sources out of our elections. we need reform that brings transparency and protects the best interests of middle class families. mr. mcnerney: i will call on the new majority to work in a bipartisan fashion to bring transparency to the campaign finance system. i supported the disclose act last year and i believe this bill is a good first step. i will continue standing up for middle-class families and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise?

without objection. >> madam speaker, tonight we will hear about the state of the union and i hope we hear that the sometimes painful truth about the state of the union. more jobs lost in the last couple years and we need to do something about that. but the answer is not more spending that leads us to greater deficits, more borrowing from china. the answer is not to continue on to have higher gas prices because we are buying our oil from opec which they use to build their lavish palaces and drive their rolls recognizes while our communities are trying to find ways to afford the patching compound to patch up our potholes. mr. murphy: what we need to do is create american jobs. a bill i'll be reintroducing from last year is one that says let's stop this moratorium that prevents us from using our oil to drill our resources. we can actually create jobs and have about $3 billion plus

without raising taxes or our trade deficit or sending more money to opec. i hope this is something this congress considers and this president has an open mind to dealing with to create jobs without creating more deficits. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does parch connecticut rise? without objection. >> tonight the president of the united states will stand in this chamber and discharge his constitutional obligation to address the state of the union before the congress. i understand many of my colleagues will be sitting 25g9 together in a bipartisan way. i think that's a good thing. what i really hope though is that we get common sensical about where we are tomorrow. as we talk about the economy that we agree we should cut regulars regulations which serve no no purpose but to stifle industry but should not attack the rules which keep our air clean and our water drinkable. we can and we must reduce the deficit and get our fiscal house in order but do not try to persuade the american public that we can fail to invest in schools, in railways, in

highways, in net without objection that will provide economic prosperity for decades to come. i'm glad i'm glad my colleagues will be sitting in this chamber tonight. what i really hope is that tomorrow we're standing together behind common sensical changes that will make this economy strong. madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri rise? without objection. >> madam speaker, i like all 434 other members of this body was elected to the 112th congress and shortly after arriving i was told that the number-one responsibility that we had was to create jobs. mr. cleaver: so far that has not been the case. we have given attention to

health care which i understood to have been one issue that we gave too much attention to. and so my question today is, what about the jobs? when are we going to talk about jobs? i would like for somebody, anybody, to talk about jobs. when are we going to do the job of creating jobs? if we do our job, then we might be able to create some jobs. if we don't nothing will happen. madam speaker, i'm urging the members of this body, particularly those who are in charge, to begin to deal with jobs. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, pursuant to the permission granted in clause 2-h of rule 2 of the rules of the u.s. house of representatives the clerk received the following message from the secretary of the senate

on january 25, 2011, at 11:00 a.m. that the senate agreed to, without amendment, house concurrent resolution 10. with best wishes i am, signed sincerely, karen l. has, clerk of the house. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the claire will postpone further proceedings today on motions to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote on the yeas and nays are ordered. or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. record votes on postponed questions will be taken later today. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa seek recognition? mr. latham: i move to suspend the rules and adopt house resolution h.res. 49. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 49. resolution providing capital

loan flags for recipients of the medal of honor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa, mr. latham, and the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. brady, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa. mr. latham: madam speaker, i ask that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. latham: thank you, madam speaker. and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. latham: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.res. 49, providing capital flown flags for recipients of the medal of honor. mr. speaker, the resolution is simple, its language is succinct, but it is so much more significant than mere symbolism. this resolution provides a family member or the medal of honor recipient themselves a u.s. flag flown over this capitol along with the certificate which reads, quote,

this flag has been flown over the united states capitol in honor of the service and sacrifice of recipients of the medal of honor. the highest honest awarded to members of the armed forces for valor in combat with profound gratitude on behalf of the united states house of representatives. madam speaker, the medal of honor is the highest honor awarded to members of the armed forces and to these medal of honor recipients we as a country, as one nation, and as this collective house are immeasurably thankful for their service, their sacrifice and their bravery which sometimes has meant giving that last full measure of devotion. i'm especially proud of staff sergeant salvatore giunta, a native of clinton, iowa, who is the first living recipient of the medal of honor since the vietnam war. and here -- and is here in the

capitol for the state of the union address this evening and a recognition ceremony tomorrow. sergeant giunta's service embodies the spirit of selflessness, humility and determination that iowans are known for both in the military and civilian life. we pass this resolution as a heartfelt and profoundly sincere thank you for those receiving the highest of honors, the medal of honor. mr. speaker, thises remain -- or, madam speaker, this resolution should garner overwhelming bipartisan support and i urge all my colleagues to support h.res. 49 and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. brady: madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. brady: thank you. madam speaker, this resolution recognizes the courage and sacrifices of staff sergeant salvatore a. giunta and other medal of honor recipients

defending their country in the line of duty. the medal of honor is the highest reward of bravery that can be given to a member of the united states armed forces. this resolution would acknowledge members of our armed forces that receive the medal of honor by providing them with the flag flown over the capitol, along with a certificate signed by the speaker of the house. the flag would be provided to the recipient or family of the recipient. may this serve as a reminder of the recipients who act heroically in defense of the freedom that we enjoy. i am pleased to support this resolution and urge all my colleagues to vote aye and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from iowa. mr. latham: if the gentleman has another speaker, i'll reserve at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman continues to reserve. mr. brady: i thank the gentleman. madam speaker, i'd now like to yield as much time as he may consume to the gentleman from iowa, mr. loebsack. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized, the gentleman from iowa. mr. loebsack: thank you, the

gentleman from pennsylvania, for yielding, and, madam spe, i am particularly honored today to join my friend and colleague, congressman latham, in offering this resolution today. tomorrow the iowa delegation will join the chief of staff of the army, general george kasey, and others to honor and recognize staff sergeant salvatore giunta, the first living medal of honor recipient since the vietnam war. staff sergeant giunta is from iowa at the moment ool he was born and raised in clinton. it's a town i am proud to represent in the second district. i first had the honor of meeting sergeant giunta or sal while visiting our troops stationed overseas during the 2009 thanksgiving holiday and i was able to have thanksgiving dinner with him. what immediately struck me about sergeant giunta was his humility. he made sergeant in just four years, he was a veteran of two tours in afghanistan by the time

he was 22 years old and while surrounded by taliban fighters in 2007 and having been hit twice himself he ran directly into gunfire in order to save his wounded comrades and prevent a u.s. soldier from being captured. since being awarded the medal of honor, sergeant giunta has insisted that he what he did to save his fellow soldiers isn't something any other soldier wouldn't have done. he's insisted time and time again, whether at the white house or the pentagon, that he holds the medal of honor on behalf of his fellow service members. after being inducted into the pentagon's hall of heroes, sergeant giunta refused to let the spotlight rest on him alone. instead he absoluted those who had come before -- saluted those who had come before him and those who have made the ultimate sacrifice in defense of our freedom. he said, and i quote, to all the ones that can't be here, not just one or two, but all of

them, not just from the 173rd, not just from battle company, but from all services, from the army, the air force, the navy, the marines, the coast guard, the national guard, the reserves, everyone who has ever given so much more than i ever know, i want to say thank you right now to those men and those women because without them i'm nothing. i haven't given anything compared to those who have given everything. and so i think it is especially appropriate that we have come together today to pay tribute not just to sergeant giunta and not just to his fellow medal of honor recipients of the war in -- wars in iraq and afghanistan, but to each of the 3,448 men and one woman who have received the highest military honor since president lincoln signed into law legislation offered by a fellow iowan to create the medal in 1861. the medal of honor is reserved for those who are distinguished, quote, conspicuously by

gallantry and intrepidity. at the risk of his life above and beyond the call of duty, unquote. it seems only appropriate that we the people's house honor their bravery, their service and their sacrifice today by directing that the united states flag be flown over the capitol in their honor. for nearly a decade, the men and women of our all-volunteer force, as well as their families, have answered the call to duty and have served our nation on two fronts. often making great sacrifices and carrying out acts of unmanageable bravery. that those of us here -- unimaginable bravery that those of us here at home never read about on the front page. even as we come together today to honor the bravest of the brave, let us also honor every man and every woman who wears our nation's uniform and who have deployed time and again in many instances to defend our nation. missing moments large and small with their families in order to ensure that our freedom endures. while he may not think of

himself as such, to me sergeant giunta is a true american hero. he is who i want my grandkids to grow up looking up to and that is a sentiment shared by thousands of iowans who are tremendously proud of the soldier we've come to think of as our hometown hero. i urge my colleagues to support this legislation as a small token of our appreciation for the incredible bravenry demonstrated by medal of honor recipients of today and those of past times and past conflicts. thank you, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa. mr. latham: i thank the speaker and i want to thank my colleague, mr. loebsack from iowa, for joining me in this resolution and his lead co-sponsorship on this. the medal of honor, like the gentleman just referred to, has quite a history with iowa. in that back in december 9,

1861, iowa senator james w. grimes first introduced the concept of a medal of honor to promote the efficiency of the navy at that time and later on there was another bill to also recognize people in the army for their outstanding service and heroic actions. i was very pleased back in 2002 to introduce a bill, i don't know how many people were aware at the time, but there was never a medal of honor flag. we had in jefferson, iowa, a memorial for captain darryl lindsay who was a medal of honor winner from the world war ii and a man named bill kindle, an army veteran from jefferson, who felt that it was inappropriate that we didn't have a flag there. so i introduced legislation, bill kindle from jefferson, iowa, actually designed what is

the medal of honor flag today and i'm still so appreciative of what he did and now at the ceremony down at the white house , when the medal of honor was given to this next great iowan, to see that flag there, it made me feel very, very proud of the contributions of so many people, iowans, people all across this country, have made and sacrificed for our country and the kind of honor that they deserve. so i'm just very proud of the history we have and i think this is a very appropriate way of recognizing those contributions. so with that i'll reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. brady: madam speaker, at this time i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from iowa, mr. boswell. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa is recognized for two minutes. mr. boswell: thank you, madam speaker, and i ask unanimous

consent to revise and extend. i rise today as a co-sponsor of house resolution 49, the staff sergeant salvatore giunta medal of honor flag resolution. as the first living medal of honor winner since the vietnam war, staff sergeant giunta richly deserves to be honored by this house. the resolution is simple. it provides every medal of honor winner or their family with a flag flown over the capitol in tribute to their service. in addition to this resolution, tomorrow we all have the opportunity to join the chief of staff of the army and distinguished guests at a ceremony and reception in the congressional auditorium to honor this soldier of whom all iowans and americans are incredibly proud. i'm not surprised in spite of this praise that sergeant giunta has humbly refused to be seen as exceptional. he has at every moment sought to deflect recognition onto his fellow soldiers, men and women in uniform, who serve as bravely every day to support and defend

giunta is right and every day the men and women in uniform are courageous and deserve to be recognized. my hope is as we honor sergeant giunta for gallantry above and beyond the call of duty we may by extension offer to every member of our armed forces and their families a profound gratitude on behalf of country, his country, our country, and the united states house of representatives. thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from iowa. mr. latham: i'll reserve at this point. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. brady: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemanyields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from iowa. mr. latham: thank you, madam speaker. we do have one more speaker is who is on his way over, but i would just like to say what an honor it is to be a part of --

for me to be a part of the ceremony tomorrow to honor staff sergeant giunta and really he is a model for what people in the military today, the service that they give, the humility that he possesses and you know, the statements that mr. loebsack made about the fact that in his acceptance he talked about this was not an award, a medal of honor for him but for all of his comrades in arms. and how it was -- should be given to everyone who acted so bravely that day. but that certainly is part of what staff sergeant giunta is all about and the fact that he is such a humble person, someone who believes in the mission,

someone who willingly was there to sacrifice himself, to save one of his comrades, i think is so appropriate that we have this recognition today, and that we honor all the people in the service today. so i do not see my colleague here on the floor, so i don't know, i would yield to someone else if you had any other statements --, with that, madam speaker, i will yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlemanyields back the balance of his time. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and agree to house resolution 49. those in favor say aye. those, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those present having voted in the affirmative, the rules are suspended,, mr. latham: madam speaker, i request the yeas and nays, please. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted.

a a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> madam speaker, by direction of the republican conference, i offer a privileged resolution and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 53. resolves, that the following named members -- >> i ask unanimous consent that the resolution considered as read and printed in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection the resolution is agreed to and the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri seek recognition? >> madam speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 366 to provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the small

business act and the small business act of 1958 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 366, a bill to provide for additional temporary extension of programs under the small business act and the small business investment act of 1958 and foorps -- for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: rule the gentleman from missouri, mr. graves, and the gentlewoman from new york, ms. velazquez, will be recognized for 20 minutes. the gentleman from missouri. mr. graves: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous materials on the bill under consideration. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlemanis recognized. mr. graves: i yield myself such time as i may consume. madam speaker, we have a big job ahead of us in the 112th congress. unemployment remains above 9% millions of people are out of work. entrepreneurs are struggling to create jobs and grow their

businesses with threats of higher taxes and government mandates. the recovery has been erratic at best. hard work lies ahead to restore confidence in our economy. today we're discussing the simple extension of programs overseen by the small business administration through may 31, 2011. enacting this legislation is a critical first step towards giving small business owners certainty while we continue to fully examine all of sba's programs and make necessary changes to services. this will give our new majority the opportunity to explore new and innovative ideas to improve services offered by the s.b.a. i'm humbled and honored to soiven our country'sen from pren new year's as the chairman of the small business administration committee and looking forward to working with ranking member velazquez to enact a more permanent re-authorization in a timely manner. we've had an excellent working relationship over the past few

years and i have no doubt it will continue in the future. we're all eager to get the work done on reducing the uncertainty that prevails throughout our economic sectors. we can take this first step toward approving this temporary extension and laying the groundwork for a full authorization that will bring these programs into the 21st century. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on the resolution before us and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from new york. ms. velazquez: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. velazquez: the role of small businesses is critical to creating new jobs. with the economy continuing to face challenges on several fronts we need small firms more than ever. time and again they have generated ideas and know-how that sparks job growth. however, entrepreneurs face challenging economic head winds. small businesses continue facing

obstacles assessing capital and still remain flat. given these realities we need to make sure that small firms have resources to expand. the legislation we are considering today does this and extends the authorization of several important small business administration programs. through these initiatives, firms can secure financing, receive training, or exet more effectively for federal contracts. while we must keep these programs operational, it is unfortunate that we are doing so through another temporary extension. last congress, the house passed 14 bills updating all of s.b.a.'s financing and entrepreneurial development programs. however, while the senate was able to report a few measures out of committee, they were unable to actually pass any legislation effecting these

programs through the chamber. as a result we are here today to temporarily extend the s.b.a.'s initiatives. small businesses across the nation depend on a strong s.b.a. this is especially true now when many unemployed individuals are turning to entrepreneurship as a source of income. by ensuring that the agency programs do not lag, we are providing small businesses with the foundation for future growth and in doing so helping move the economy forward. madam speaker, i urge a yes vote and if the gentleman doesn't have any other speakers i'm prepared to yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection yields back her time. mr. graves: let me reiterate small businesses are going to lead this economic recovery but we have to provide them with certainty first and enacting this legislation before us is going to do just that. let entrepreneurs know we're back on their side.

once again i urge my colleagues to support this legislation. i look forward to working with ranking member velazquez and our colleagues on the small business committee for a more permanent extension and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 366. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those present having voted in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> madam speaker, spurent house resolution 43 i call up house resolution 38 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 3, house resolution 38,

resolution to reduce spending through a transition to nonsecurity spending at fiscal year 2008 levels. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 43, the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on rules printed in the resolution is adopted. and the resolution as amended is considered read. the gentleman from california, mr. dreier, and the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, each will control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks on the resolution that is before us. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: madam speaker, one of the indelible and enduring images of 2010 was that of violent protesters on the streets of athens following the proposal of the government to impose austerity measures. we all remember very vividly that scene. coming to the brinks brink of

collapse and nearly dragging the entire euro zone with it, the greek government had no choice, no choice but to scale back its profligate ways. thousands of public employees took to the streets in anger. now, madam speaker, i contrast that with the image of tens of thousands of peaceful demonstrators across america coming out to express their influences stration with -- sfration with excessive government spending. rather than demanding federal largess, these tax-taxed-enough demonstrators came together to petition their government for greater restraint and discipline. this might actually, madam speaker, have been a first in human history. it was a powerful illustration of the unique nature of american values.

it was also a testament to just how badly fiscal discipline is needed. this issue is no longer just the per view of budget wonks and economists. the looming crisis of our national debt is a challenge that working americans recognize very clearly. while the magnitude of a $14 trillion debt is simply too massive to truly comprehend, those with a modicum of common common sense can appreciate the crushing whailt that will full on future generation if we do not immediately change course, the damage could quickly become irreversible. today's resolution is a clear signal that we are making that change in course. house resolution 38 is the first step, madam speaker, the first step in what will be a long and admittedly very difficult process over the next two years

as we pursue the goal of living within our means. . this resolution lays down a marker to return to pre-bailout, pre-binge spending, pre-stimulus levels. this resolution provides the framework under which we will finally dispense with the fiscal year 2011 budget which the previous congress unfortunately failed to do. nearly halfway through the fiscal year, we're nearly halfway through the fiscal year, now the imperative is to responsibly finish the work that is really very, very urgent for us to approach and deal with at this moment. once we move beyond this task we will immediately pivot to fiscal year 2012. we will craft a budget, we will consider alternatives with a full debate and then this house will pass a budget. we will then proceed with

consideration of appropriations bills. we will return to the traditional open process that always governed our appropriations bills prior to the last couple of years. this will ensure full accountability and true collaboration and restore the deliberative traditions and customs of this body. there will be very tough choices ahead. very tough choices need to be made. there will be -- there's no doubt that we will engage in heated debate and i suspect we will in just a few minutes right here. but we simply cannot afford to put off the hard work any longer. madam speaker, today we take the first step. i urge my colleagues to support this resolution. with that i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. govern governor thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i -- mr. mcgovern: thank you, madam speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise in very, very strong opposition to this resolution. as i said yesterday during the debate on the rules, there are

numerous serious problems with this resolution. first, it's meaningless rhetoric. my friends on the other side of the aisle like to talk a lot about cutting government spending but the resolution before us doesn't cut a single dollar from the budget. not a single cent. the republican study committee recently proposed $2.5 trillion in budget cuts and their chairman, mr. jordan from ohio, said the following when he introduced this plan, and i quote, $100 billion is the number the american people heard last fall. it seems to me we should be able to find $100 billion, end quote. yet even after pledging $100 billion cut in funding, the distinguished chairman of the rules committee couldn't come up with a number. we asked yesterday and instead produced what is likely the first budget resolution in history that doesn't contain any budget numbers. that might be because the republican majority can't seem to figure out what the numbers should be. we've heard all kinds of numbers.

we've heard $30 billion, $50 billion, $100 billion and beyond. but i suspect, madam speaker, that's because the republican majority is discovering that it's a lot harder to walk the walk than it is to talk the talk. it is a lot easier to say things in a campaign than it is to do things in a legislative body. they're realizing that when you start trying to make those kinds of cuts, you start seriously affecting the american economy and the american people. we are told that the congressional budget office will produce some numbers tomorrow. i wonder why we couldn't wait until tomorrow to debate this resolution? but the answer is obvious. the president of the united states will be here this evening for the state of the union address and the republican majority needs a new set of talking points. it's that kind of politics, where a message is more important than substance, that makes the american people cynical about washington. second, the resolution continues the dangerous precedent of giving one individual, the chairman of the budget committee, rather than the full

membership of this house, the ability to set spending levels for the federal government. and, third, the resolution is vegas and unjustifies wording that only targets nonsecurity spending although everyone from secretary gates to speaker boehner has recognized that waste exists in the department of defense and at the department of homeland security and other security-related agencies. it says a great deal about the priorities of a new republican majority that they would treat wasteful contracts and redun can't dant weapons system -- redundant weapons systems as sacred but would put food safety, f.b.i., a.t.f. and d.e.a. agents and other vital programs on the chopping block. now, of course, when we democrats have the audacity to talk about the need to protect those important programs, our republican friends grow indignant and head to the fainting couch. oh, no, they say, we would never cut those things. but, madam speaker, the numbers just don't add up. when you start saying the

popular program, the popular program will be protected, you realize that it would take massive cuts in other parts of the budget. when we talk about exempting only security programs, it means that other programs will need to be cut by 30% below current levels. that means the department of justice has to cut 4,000 f.b.i. agents, 800 a.t.f. agents, 1,500 d.e.a. agents and 900 u.s. marshals. federal prisons have to cut 5,700 correctional officers and the federal government will lose the capacity to detain 26,000 people because of their immigration status. now of course the distinguished chairman of the rules committee said we're not going to cut the f.b.i., as we said yesterday, so i can only assume that means more a.t.f. agents and d.e.a. agents and u.s. marshals will be fired by the republicans. i can only assume that this means more than 26,000 people in this country illegally won't be in federal custody. that's the republican agenda?

madam speaker, i think former secretary of state colin powell said it best this weekend and i quote, i'm very put off when people just say, let's go back and freeze to the level two years ago. don't tell me you're going to freeze to a level. that usually is a very inefficient way of doing it. tell me what you're going to cut. as i urge my colleagues to reject this misguided resolution, i ask my republican colleagues, what's the number and what are you going to cut? i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: madam speaker, i yield myself 30 seconds to say to my good friend, again, that this is the beginning of a process. we have been saddled with situation where for the first time since the implementation of the 1974 budget impoundment act we have no budget. and so what is it we've elected to do? nearly halfway through the fiscal year we're faced with this challenge. we're now in a position where we are going to begin going through regular order to ensure that we have a budget which we didn't do last year and have an open,

free-flowing debate on the amendments through the appropriations process. and i will say to my friend that defense issue issues are going to be a high priority -- that defense issues are going to be a high priority. with that, madam speaker, i'd like to yield three minutes to my very good friend and colleague, the distinguished chair of the committee on the budget from whom we're going to be hearing later this evening, the gentleman from jamesville, washington, d.c., mr. ryan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington, d.c. is recognized for three minutes. mr. ryan: i thank the chairman for yielding. madam speaker, i'm enjoying the rhetoric we're hearing today about one person, one committee, one man dictating in all these things. as if it's an unprecedented action. well, this move is not unprecedented. the reason this is necessary is unprecedented. it is unpress debitted since the -- unprecedented since the 1974 budget act passed that congress didn't boggetter to pass or even propose a -- didn't bother to pass or even propose a budget. madam speaker, the reason we're here today is because the last majority last year didn't even

bother trying. that means we have no budget in place. and with no budget in place there's no budget act to enforce. that means government is going and spending unchecked, no limits, no policemen on the beat, nothing. why are we giving this kind of power to the chairman of the budget committee, to put these numbers in? because we don't get the numbers from the congressional budget office until tomorrow. and we've said all along what we aim to do, bring the structuring levels down to pre-bailout, pre-stimulus levels. and then for all the authorizing committees, it's put the c.b.o. baseline in place. it doesn't exist right now. it comes tomorrow. so what we're simply trying to do, madam speaker, is get some sense of limits back on spending. get some sense of a budget process back in place. we don't think we should have a system, a spending process, without restrainting, without limits, without any prioritization. that is exactly why we're doing

this. business as usual has to come to an end, madam speaker. and we've got to put limits on spending and that is why we have a budget act, to police the spending process, to make sure that it conforms. but there is no budget act, there is no number to police because they didn't do a budget last year. that is exactly and precisely why this measure is necessary. so all the rhetoric aside, the days are over of unlimited spending, of no prioritization and the days of getting spending under control are just beginning. this is a first step in a long process. this is a minimal, small down payment on a necessary process to go forward so that we can live our -- leave our kids with a better generation, so we can get this debt under control, so the spending spigot can close so, we can do right by our constituents and treat their dollars wisely. with that, madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back.

the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. mcgovern: thank you, madam speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i'm glad the chairman of the budget committee finally joined this debate. and i would say two things. one is that last year we passed a budget enforcement act with real numbers in it and we voted on it and it was significantly less than the number that the president had proposed, number one. number two, one of the things that we proposed in the rules committee was an amendment to allow members of the house, on both sides of the aisle, to be able to vote on the number. and that was rejected on party line as somehow a radical idea. and then the chairman of the rules committee talks about this free-flowing debate we're having. we're having this debate today under a closed rule. and so there's no opportunity for amendment. and with that -- mr. dreier: will the gentleman yield? mr. mcgovern: i yield to the gentleman. mr. dreier: i thank my friend for yielding. i'd like to point to my colleaguings, madam speaker, h.res. 38. it's a one-sentence measure, a one-sentence measure which says

that our goal is to get to 2008 levels of spending or less. mr. mcgovern: i thank the gentleman. reclaiming my time. i appreciate the brevity of the bill but that doesn't mean the bill has a very negative impact. when we tried yesterday to protect the f.b.i. and enforcement agents from cuts, that was voted down. so we're very concerned. we don't know what the number is. and i think the people in this congress on both sides of the aisle, the american people, ought to know what we're talking about. where is it? and where tho are those cuts going to come from when you keep on exempting programs? with that, madam speaker, i yield three minutes to the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for three minutes. mr. van hollen: thank you, madam speaker. and i thank my colleague. here we are a day later, yesterday we asked our colleagues, what's the number going to be? what's going to be the spending ceiling for this congress and for the united states government? they didn't have it yesterday and we don't yet have it today. it's a budget resolution without

a budget number. now, we've heard a lot of talk about what happened last year. what this budget resolution relates to is 2011. in fact, this body voted last year on a budget enforcement act, i have it right here in my hand, and it set budget ceiling, it had a real number. some people voted for it, some people voted against it, but this body did what it always does when it makes decisions of this magnitude, we took accountability for it. now you have a resolution that violates the pledge of transparency, because it doesn't have a single number on it, and it violates the pledge of accountability because you're asking every other member of this body to contract out his or her vote to one person. now, i have great respect for the chairman of the budget committee and i too congratulate him on being selected to give the response to the state of the union address. this isn't about a particular individual, it's about all of us

taking responsibility for a major decision and what this resolution does is contracts out that responsibility, it doesn't have a number, we don't know if it's going to be $100 billion, we don't know if it's going to be $40 billion, we don't know if it's going to be the number that the republican study conference wants, which the majority leader said good things about. we don't know. what we do know is this, that the bipartisan deficit and debt reduction commission told us two things. number one, we need to act now to put this country on a fiscally sustainable path and we should do that by working together. they also said another thing, that deep immediate cuts beyond what had been put in place and recommended by the fiscal commission would hurt the economy when it's in a very fragile state and risk throwing more americans out of work. that would be a terrible mistake