h.s. rule on medical loss ratio for climates under the patent protection and affordable care act, h.j.res. 19, i'm going after that with the congressional review act and nefshap for portland cement manufacturing industry, h.j.res. 42, again, representative carter this rule is likely to close 18 cement kilns around the country and destroy good american jobs, driving them overseas to places like china and india, possibly increasing the mercury pollution in the united states from offshore pollution. . these are examples we have been working on and we talked about them before. i can assure you that my office right now is daily, daily,

checking every service we can find to find every regulation that is being proposed, so we can look at the ones we can be aggressive and take the offense on. the reigns act which shifts the burden arbitration we say in the law and it would mean we would have to vote on any major regulation as by the definition that mr. davis has given. so, both these tools will be available to members of this congress for us to be able to look at these administrative rules that are being passed, which are basically done by individuals and agencies, not by this congress, and give this congress, who represent the people, to be responsible for whether or not the rule passes. therefore, if the folks back home want somebody to blame, you know what?

that's what you take this job for. the buck stops with your vote. if you support the rule, you are going to be responsible for it and folks don't like it, you are going to own it. you know what? that's what we came up here for. we came up here to be responsible to our constituents. maybe mr. davis would like to comment again. mr. davis: just to your point on being responsible, one thing that i share along these lines, one of the jobs that all members of congress has is to explain to their constituents what's happening in washington and also to washington what their constituents think. when we come down to these rules, i think the one thing that is so critical for us to understand is, we walk out -- i have seen it in my early time here. i saw it during the health care debate when people would walk

out and do press conferences. we read the bill in our office and we didn't see any of that happening. it took six months and 12 months and people were waking up to things that weren't there. there was an extreme backlash and there was a growth of government intrusion. by having this check and balance, it does several things. it restores transparency so people can see. it forces members of congress to communicate with their district. if we think a regulation is important to have enacted or a law, we need to have that discussion with our constituents so they understand as well as a discussion with the agency discussion before it goes to the floor of the house. by bringing about this reins process would take these major rules back here for an up or

down vote. if the community is doing its job, that is straightforward. an attempt by the executive to step outside the will of the people, then we get into this -- and this is important. i go back to the question of the congressional review act. not directly tied to this by regulation, but oftentimes in the agencies, there's an attempt that takes place to fall into a routine of operation. and in times of crisis, those are not always the most effective thing. many of us remember back in the early days of the wars in iraq and afghanistan, regardless of one's politics, positions on the policy, we suddenly found ourselves in a new kind of counterinsurgency that had not been expected by the military or had the expectations set by the administration and then they were caught by surprise.

because of the promulgation by thousands of i.e.d.'s by the fall of 2003, the army and marine corps specifically recognized we were in a full blown counterinsurgency and had to react. they said it would take semple years in order to accomplish what was necessary and laws would have to be enacted. and i think some of the things i have seen in military programs that began 15, 25 years ago and simply die because sometimes gets to an executeable weapons system, there is not that response but these rules that govern the mindset of how the government operates. telling division commanders and company commanders that it was going to be a couple of years down the road is not the way

americans think and operate. in world war ii, we fielded all kinds of technology. what worked was made in mass and showed the aguilt of our industrial complex. this is long before the large industrial bureaucracy came into being. what it took for congress to get the up-arm oured vehicle program into theater -- and it was amazing. 39,000 armored vehicles that would not have gone into iraq but took an act of congress to exert on the executive branch the will of the american people. this was the case where the president couldn't overcome it. something not uncommon. coming back into our world here with the regulations that affect us economically in day-to-daytime. by restoring accountability and

dialogue and the constitution allows us to do our job and protect the american people and make sure we give them someone toll hold accountable at the end of the day. you can't fire the director of the e.p.a. or secretary of education or any of a number of other agency heads if they implement regulations that are not what our communities, what our country wants and it brings an end to this government that is run by experts that don't reflect what the will of the american people is. your colleague from texas gave a speech a couple of years ago on c.f.c. light bulbs. i find it amazing in the mandate in 2007, one was dropped in the longworth office building and the building was evacuated. mr. poe read the regulatory requirements dealing with a

dropped light bulbs. it is so expensive to deal with the regulations, none of them will be made in the united states of america. they are made in china. and i think that is one example that shows this. we can restore american economic competenttiveness and protect the american people and do it in such a way that it is in context and not putting layer or layer that increases the size of government and increases the size of our pocketbook and i yield back. mr. carter: those are excellent comments and those light bulbs are a particular sticking point in my life. i don't like being mandated to purchase anything, quite honestly, by the government and it's really kind of hipt critical to say everyone has to

use these lights and can't make them in our country and we create the regulators. i guess what we are trying to say to folks out there and the people in this chamber, that it's time to take a look at this secret world of regulators. i don't think i would make a bad estimate if regulations were presented on both sides of paper like that size paper, and this chamber has, what, 80-foot ceilings, 100-foot ceilings and it's probably 40 yards long and 20 yards wide, this chamber -- these regulations on pages like this, it would be -- you would have to two, three of them to

cover the i.r.s. code and the other regulations. the number of regulations that are out there will literally boggle your mind. if there is a good reason to have the internet is to have somebody keep track of the regulations. probably better than anybody i can think of. but they're there and interfere with our lives. some of them help and some of them don't. and the realms' representatives should have a say. and the congressional review act is giving us a chance to have a say and we hope to bring many of these, actually all of these before the house for a vote and to the floor of the senate for a vote. but when the reins act is passed and signed into law, it gives us another way to get the people of this country to cast a vote on behalf of their citizens back home as to whether a major

regulation will or will not help this nation. as we sit here trying to take down barriers to creating jobs, if there's one thing we have to do more than anything else that we got to do, from now and into the future in this congress is help take down barriers and get the entrepreneurial spirit going again and get the environment is such that people quit sitting on their money and hire new people to help them make bigger profits and grow their companies by hiring people and giving them a job. that is our number one priority. and these regulations, some of them are good, but many of them are onerous and prevent these jobs. i have nothing -- unless the gentleman has anything else, i yield back the balance of our

time and i thank the speaker. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the the gentlewoman from virgin islands, mrs. christensen is recognized as the majority of the minority leder. mrs. christensen: we honor the women of our communities who employ their sacrifice serving as inspiration for all of us. march is women's history month, celebrated this year with the theme, our history is our strength. we know the stories in our families and communities of mothers, grandmothers, godmothers, aunts and sisters who pull together to make sure that everyone within their power was fed, educated and remained healthy. those are a lot of resources

shared what they had. they gave of their time and hearts to bring generations into existence to nurture all of the communities' children despite all of the odds before them. as we highlight the achievements of women we speak of the gains women have made and those that are being threatend by the 112th congressional majority. i would like to read some quotes from the secretary of state and the president of the united states. first the secretary, she's quoting from her remarks on women's history month. we commemorate the international women's day, global, economic and political achievements of women's past, present and future. we pay tribute to ordinary women throughout the world and rooted in women's struggles to

participate in society on an equal footing with men. this day reminds us that while enormous progress has been made, there is still work to be done before women achieve through parity. and from president obama, we have to work enharder to close the gap that still exists and to uphold the simple american ideal. we are all equal and deserving of the chance to pursue our version of happiness. that is what eleanor roosevelt strived towards half a century ago. the report on women that was issued this women matters today and on behalf of all of our daughters and sons we have to continue to make progress. before i yield to the the gentlewoman from texas, i ask unanimous consent, mr. speaker, that all speakers may have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to add material to the subject we are discussing this

evening. now it's my pleasure to yield as much time as she might consume, the gentlewoman from texas, sheila jackson lee. ms. jackson lee: i would like to thank the gentlelady from the virgin islands and being the lead on monday after monday, opportunities to be able to engage our constituents and speak on a number of very important issues. i thank you for your leadership. and i have certainly be privileged to be part of this very important opportunity to speak on a number of challenging issues. many of us just arrive back in washingtonment and spent precious days with our constituents and it's amazing the number of issues we are encountering, individuals who are impacted by the broken and unfixed immigration law,

individuals who are in need of small business assistance or health care. these are the real issues of americans or those who are gathering to join their allies and friends in wisconsin, as they are concerned and almost intimidated somewhat about the misdirected approach to budget cutting by cutting out rights of workers, many of whom who are women. . i think speaking of women is crucial as we celebrate women's history day. we know from the founding of the country, women were standing side-by-side with the founders, those of us who come from slavery know that a slave

woman who was sold could turn to another slave woman and say, could you take care of my children, i can't take them with me, or if she lost her life, the families of other slaves rallied around those children. i would think the same of native americans, indian women who were the back bone of their families, women who came from places around the world, irish women, women from great britain or poland or from south and central america or the caribbean. these are women who come to the united states and were part of the founding. i speak of my grandmother, olive jackson, who came from jamaica, west indies, and with her husband albert went to panama and helped build in the teeming woods and forests of that era, fighting against malaria and mosquitoes and diseases and were part of building the panama canal.

how my family -- grandmother kept the family together and gave birth to her first son an survived to be able to make it here to the united states and had children born in south carolina and made their way up and finally got to brooklyn, new york, and a part of the history of this country. she kept the family together. let me just call a roll if you don't mind, of some of the women from texas, please note there are many others, like mrs. johnson, the wife of lyndon baines johnson, who was so much involved in the beautification of texas, her daughter, lucy baynes johnson, her other daughter, linda robb johnson, and one who spoke about she would not see the constitution declined or diminished and that she believed that even though it did not include her when it started that this constitution means we the people, that's

what this means. ann richards, the former governor, late governor of texas. mayor kathy whit meier, ruby mosley who has been such a leader and pioneer and changer. willie bell boone. christy adair,ester williams a great political earlier actist, irma of irma's fabulous mexican restaurants, a businesswoman who with her children by her side opened one of the famous restaurants in houston. representative alvarado, representative hernandez, commissioner sylvia garcia, could be sillmen jones, the late dorothy hubbard, mayor parker, small businesswomen, the late nancy berkman, who was so pivotal in working on the mickey leland kibbutz program,

joyce scheckter, a premier advocator of policies, the woman -- women and doctors at the march of dimes they work with, the sacrifice they make, the former councilwoman robinson, the wife of the late judson robinson, the first councilmember to be elected and once he passed, councilmember robinson, his wife, took his place. jewel mcgowan, a great educator, dr. wanda maude a great doctor, and certain li ling liu, a chi meeze american, an american from bangladesh at texas southern university. my mother and my aunt -- aunts, aunt valley, aunt vickie, aunt cybill, they along with the women of courage we honored a

week or so ago with secretary clinton and mrs. obama, michelle obama, which i include in the greatstness of how far women have come they make a statement. that what we are doing in the budget, what we're doing in the c.r., does not take into account all the sweat and toil of hardworking women. can you tell me how we would ignore a health care reform that women no long ver to be subjected to pre-existing conditions as a means of getting insurance and therefore pregnancy does not stifle a woman working on a job from getting insurance. it bans insurance companies from dropping women when they get sick or become pregnant. for women in new plans that provides free coverage of important life-saving prevent i have services, women who are sometimes a sickle head of household, oler women who have chronic conditions, they can now be covered because of preventive care, bans insurance

companies from obtaining women to requiring a referral for access to ob/gyn care. what an antiquated system that required women not to be able to go to a doctor for ob/gyn care, we have gotten rid of that, and the practice of jenner rating, charging women higher, yet this affordable health care is on the chopping block. it -- it ensures that children under 19 can't be left out for pre-existing conditions. women would have to take off or quit or get on welfare to be able to find some coverage or insurance. greater access to women to insurance by women and yet as we commemorate women's hstry month we have a situation where our friends on the other side of the aisle are slashing and burning and cut, they've already voted to repeal the affordable care act. what does it say to the history of women in this country?

let me quickly move to some additional harms to women, republican proposed cuts that will harm women and their families, title x family planning, this has provided family planning service, breast and cervical cancer screening and other preventive health care to low-income women. it has provided -- served more than five million women. can you imagine that healthy women make a difference in this country, les hours of sick women, less children away from the home, less women able to bear children and able to go out into the workplace because they have suffered a lack of access to health care. well, my friends if you can imagine, this is where we are today. $300 million in a vote just by congressperson from indiana who won the vote 240 to 185 to prohibit any funding to planned

parenthood. by the way, planned parenthood reads, they understand, their moneys are used if family planning. it is used to detect cervical cancer, breast cancer, it is used to provide preventive service to millions of women dealing with h.i.v. testing, breast examine exams and contrasepping but none of these dollars will be used for ha i suppose this was supposed to inhibit, abortion. they've been following the law for years. in women's history month, what are we saying to our women? it cuts nutrition program for pregnant women and their children $747 million. special supplemental nutrition programs. the wmple i.c. program, can you believe it? suggesting it's a waste of program when most educators will tell you children not nourished in the early stages have a default in their ability to think and to be table to do well in school. cut head start and child care, people approach me in my

district, on the streets here in washington, d.c., cutting $1.1 billion from head start, $39 million from child care. i want you to know i'm dealing with a case in my district where a federal dollars were supporting a home kk -- home child care. as you well know, those requirements are less than head start. and now do you know what we have? four dead babies. in this child care home care center where a fire consumed them. unfortunately, because the caretaker made a mistake. this is what i'm dealing with. and so my question is, you're cutting head start? you're cutting child care? people are standing in line to get child care. people are being turned away. they don't know what to do. young mothers who are trying to do right, who are trying to get a job and they real ides this is a problem. cuts job training.

i've had young mothers in job training programs, $4 billion are they telling me it doesn't work? these are particularly important to women workers, many of them coming out of the home after they've had children and they can place them in a school setting or head start and get back to work. they can be contributing to the tax base and to the society and be able to teach their children about the work ethic because they're young and want to do so. cutting that, cutting 3el8 grants when i went out to lone star college, what did i see in young women, some of them young mother, getting the opportunity of a second life. it halts funding for the implementation of a health care law, i've already spoken about that, maternal and child health and social security for women who are seniors. i just don't understand what we are trying to do. so i would just argue the point in this women's history month, there are -- there's a breakdown, there's a mental block, don't let me start talking about the minority

women-owned businesses where they're cutting mbda zhrrs.9 million, cutting $3 billion for the work force and leaving our american heroes out in the coal, women who have been veterans, cutting them $75 million who may have been homeless. i'ved me melt women homeless veterans, i see them every day. it's only recently we've acknowledged they have ptsd and other problems. i met them, they beg nerd programs to continue because they served their country as well. and then lo and behold, we have just shut the doors on community health clinics, manage the congressional black caucus worked so hard on, $1.3 billion, cutting 3.2 million patients where they can come out of their homes and go to a doctor and not wind up in the emergency room that pushes up the tax costs by the public hospital system and the private hospital system, yet we continue cutting these programs. i'm reminded of barbara

jordan's words about not being worried about being called a politician. she said, i want to be called a darn good politician. that's what we should be looking at here in this place as we honor women and women's history month, that we can all be good elected officials and good politicians that make a difference. we make a difference on maff of all the american people, no party affiliation. that we don't cut and jab into collective bargaining in states around this country when in fact clectsive bargaining is simply giving someone the opportunity to sit down at the bargaining table, nursesmark of them women, teachersmark of them women, women who have come out of of he household to support their family and may be the only breadwinner. let me thank you for giving us the opportunity to support women of all persuasions all over this country. let me personally thank you for the nurturing you have given,

the soldiers and sons you have sent off to battle throughout the ages. to the gold star mothers, to the blue star mothers i work with in my district, thank you for the sacrifices that you've made. thank you for nurturing those who are still mending and healing, who have been wounded in war, whether the war of the ages or the wars we have just been count -- just encountered in iraq and afghanistan and let me thank the mothers of the middle east, from egypt to bahrain to yemen to libya and most of all to libya, let me thank the women who have gone into battle, let the thank the women who have lost children because they wanted freedom in battle. let me thank the peace lovers and all i would say as we commemorate women's he'sry month, the names i have just called, they represent the strength and our history and it is on their shoulders i stand, it is on their shoulders that i

pledge that i will never give up, as john lewis said, never give out, never give in because women today are truly having, as the wind beneath their winds -- wings, all the women who have gone before or the older women who stand alongside them. finally i would say to the young women, let me say that the road is never as smooth as one would like. it is rocky with mountains and valleys. but take the opportunity to learn and to build so that you can have wings as well. women's history month, i is a lulet you and the women and i believe in your strength and i believe in your spirit. and your history. i yield back to the yealt. . mrs. christensen: thank you for your inspiring words and thank you for your participation in these monday evening special orders. and you listed a lot of the very

special women in your district, as you said, on whose shoulders we stand and i could list women from my district who are leaders in the fight for freedom and justice, labor leaders, doctors, clearing, doctors, nurses and teachers, those who have been role models. but i want to spend some of my time to salute a pioneering educator in my district who would have celebrated her 96th birthday on march 26 if she had not left us. women of her generation, delta deush, born in 12915, two years, she was a renuned educator, story teller and tradition

bearer, tall in stature and stood out as a women of class, of intell against and excellence in all she did. in her lifetime, she witnessed the birth, growth and development of the modern virgin islands from the transfer of ownership from denmark to the united states to the quest of people to greater self-government and determination. to welcoming people from many shores to its present position, poised with its modern concerns of quality health care and education for all, environmental and cultural sustainability, energy independence and a future for its children of a life lived and peace and security with access to quality life that provides good, stable employment opportunities. she was educated at columbia university and who studied international education at the university of london and university of heidelberg in

germany served as a teacher and supervisor in the school system. she served as an instructor of elementary education in undergraduate programs and deputy commissioner for curriculum and instruction in the virgin islands department of education from 1977 to 1982 and chair of the board of directors of the episcopal school. her resume does not convey the quality of care she gave to the students. she was a mentor and a special friend to many, encouraging them to achieve and work for excellence. she worked throughout her time to preserve values and heritage, taking upon herself to learn the folk stories that had been passed down from generation to generation and share them with the young and not so young. her message was simple, don't

forget your culture, your way of life and every day things that make you unique and special. in jigs to education and culture she was active in politics, supporting the campaigns of candidates and giving advice to those who sought her counsel. she received many awards. the national junior honor society of the junior high school is named in her honor as is the residents' hall fee campus. she participated in the virgin islands folk life festival here in d.c. where she told stories that are particular to the u.s. virgin islands and authored a book and video on the role of the story teller and preservation of virgin islands

culture and contributed to our current edition of the glory days. she made her mark as a woman of substance in the u.s. virgin islands and left a trail for the rest of us to follow. it is in her spirit of determination that i stand here today to speak about the current state of women, not only in the u.s. virgin islands but across our nation. mr. speaker, we are now in a time that has shown great progress for women as i read from our president earlier. but we also find ourselves at a crossroads where there are many areas where our welfare is threatend. some of them were enumerated by my colleague from texas. according to a recent report entitled "women in america," which is published this month, women have outpaced men in educational attainment, earning

more college agrees and graduate education but more likely than men to live in poverty. back hispanic females are largely to be more poorer. black women have a 28% rate of poverty, white women, 11%, also too high. while more education income increases income for men and women, the pay gap between the two still exists. more women than men work part-time and that means less likely to be insured or to have other benefits. at all levels of education, women earn still about 75% as much as their male counterparts. the female-headed families have the lowest earning of all family types. they face health challenges. depression, for example, and more women than men have a

chronic medical condition. more of us are uninsured and don't report having a usual source of care. 18% of none elderly women lack health insurance. 21% of african american women, 38% of latino women are uninsured. so the challenge to improve the lives of all women continues and we democrats are proud that in the historic 111th congress presided over the first female speaker of this house, we passed the lilly ledbetter fair pay act which restores regulations on unfair pay. we passed the pay check fairness act which restores effective recommends for women who aren't

payed equal wages. we created 3.3 million jobs many held by women. the stimulus package passed by this house expanded opportunities in the transportation industry by investing and training for them and highway construction and transportation technology and included assistance to obtain contracts and helping 3.5 million women students obtain higher education through the increases in the pell grant funding and key investments in early education by providing funding by increasing head start creating 30,000 jobs for teachers and assistants. services of family and children was strengthened in the 111th congress for block grants and

for programs to reduce violence against women. in the 111th congress the affordable health care act increase accessed for high number of women to access health care and uninsured made their insurance more secure and made it illegal to charge women more than women and to make choices. our 1.8 million veterans have a chance at improved health care with the expansion of the health care services by removing barriers and providing up to seven days of care and enhancing treatment for sexual trauma for women at the v.a. much was done in the last congress to enhance and protect the lives of women. but in this congress, it seems we are to take giant steps backward when it comes to health, education, finances to women and families.

the budget cuts being proposed are definitely going to adversely impact the women of this country. and i have been joined by congresswoman gwen moore of wisconsin and i would invite her to use as much time as she would like to consume. ms. moore: i'm so pleased that you put this special order together to memorialize the contributions that african american women have made in this our month of march, a tribute to all women. as the democratic co-chair of the women's caucus, i am particularly proud to talk about the accomplishments and challenges, quite frankly, of african heem american women in this country. it is so obvious we have to

honor some of our ancestors on whose shoulders we stand, women like harriet tubman who led slavets out of slavery even at the point of a rifle, a strong african american woman who instilled the self-respect and self-esteem in the african -american community that has helped us survive all kinds of tragedies in our community. joe journer, who was engaged heavily in the women's right to vote movement in the suffrage movement and haber in mississippi who fought for the right to vote and rosa parks who fought to end the segregation in the south on accommodation and

moving through history, people like walker, first millionaire. so many people, i could just go on and on, naming women in business and entertainment, oprah winfrey to our very own first lady, our own great michelle robinson obama. but i think such a tribute would not be complete if we did not recognize some of the people who are unknown to people, some of the unsung heroes within our own community. and i'm thinking of such a woman right now, a woman named velva lee phillips. she lived in milwaukee, wisconsin and graduated from the same school that golda graduated

from and it was a predominantly white school and she won a contest and the school was reluctant to give her that prize because she was a black student. and of course the majority white student body rebeled and insisted that she win the prize as an orator. she came to be known as vel. and she went on to run for alederman of the city of milwaukee. there had never been a woman who had won a seat on the common council until vel ran and because she shortend her name, they thought she was a man and did not she was black.

she was the first woman and first black person to become an alderman and first black woman to graduate from the university of wisconsin law school, first black person to become a judge in milwaukee county. she was the first black woman to ever serve on a national party committee in both in either the democrats and republican national committees, very first black woman. she is the first and only african american who has ever won a statewide office in the state of wisconsin. she is a alive and kicking and is a major force in the community brainstorming conference of milwaukee. sort of a black think tank in milwaukee that talks about all

kinds of social situations in milwaukee, very thriving organization in our community. but even then it would be in appropriate to end this tribute without talking about those unknown women who have contributed so much and i believe that this hour started out with your referencing some of these people. big momma, eight peaches, cousin fanning, these people who dug deep in their pockets to pull out a carefully folded $20 bill to press into your hand as they went off to your college to give you support. those people who scrubbed floors and were not proud to try to give you a better life than they had, those people who held the

family together when all else failed. that is why african americans have thrifed and survived to the extent they have because of the strength of the african-american woman in our community. . i will tell you that african-american women are facing some tremendous challenges right now. we live in america and african-americans are very proud to be americans. but the fact still remains that there is no level playing field in america for african-american women. women in general only earn 77 cents for every dollar that a man earns. and of course african-american women earn even less than that. and they're faced with so many challenges with a very high

incarceration rate among african-american men. african-american women are often finding themselves in situation where they are the sole breadwinners in a family where their wages are less than african-american men's or any men's in this country. african-american women, though, have continued to show that they are overcomers, that they can step outside of their story, that they can stand in the truth of their power and continue to inspire generation after generation after generation of african-americans. and we see this so often when we think of people in our community who have been raised up by single females -- single

female heads of households but who have continued to move forward. we look at our own president barack obama. he is an african-american, his mother was not an african-american woman but she mirrored the condition of so many african-american women in this country, finding themselves rearing african-american children on their own. and that is why, i think, it is important to come to this floor and to implore our colleagues to not eviscerate the kinds of support that make so much difference to children. like the women, infant and children's program. where there have been efforts to cut that by $747 million. efforts to cut head start. efforts to cut the maternal and child health block grant. efforts to cut out basic kinds

of support that african-american women need to support their often lonely task of trying to rear children who are already poor. and the genius of african-american women to cobble together a living where there seems to be nothing is something that i admire a great deal and something quite frankly that i have been a beneficiary of. my mother was the mother of nine children, i'm the eighth of nine children and my mother was poor. at the point at which i was born, my mother had nine children and did not have a high school education. she went back to high school, this is prior to g.e.d.'s, she wept back to high school when i was about 5 years old. and she got an associate's degree after that. and she went on to graduate and

become magna cum laude as an adult and she -- all this time she kept us feed with beans and corn bread and rice and plenty of fresh water out of lake michigan. and she believed firmly in taking us to church and feeding us at the trough of religion and good morality and having compassion and loving justice. and her very best friend, syria travis, who went to church with her, as a daughter, dr. dorothy travis manufacture moore who has established a school in milwaukee devoted to helping struggling african-american men because they saw how these strong black women worked hard and my mom and mrs. travis inspired a whole generation of

african-american men and women to strive for a life better than they had. they helped my -- my mom helped so many young people go on and win college scholarships. she used to train them and tour them -- and tutor them to win scholarships from the local masons in oratorical contests. this is why i can't stop, gentlelady from the virgin islands, because i had a role model in my own life of a sociological miracle, someone who overcame all the things it had been said she couldn't do. that's why when people tell me i can't do something, i have what all children should have, a background of someone close to them that says continuously, yes i can, yes i can, yes i can.

and as black women, we can do it. however scarce our resources, however austere these budgets are, we're not going to go away. we are americans, we work hard, we have built this country and we have provided this country with a lot of genius. we have provided original music, we have provided inventions in agriculture, we have built this capitol with our sweat, blood, and tiers. and -- and tears and as african-americans we are proud of the american part and as black women we have given birth not only to our children but we have given birth to a great country. i yield to the gentlelady from the virgin islands.

mrs. christensen: thank you for those words. i know that those who are listening are really inspired by all of the -- all of what you are saying, we are so proud to have you as co-chair of the women's caucus in this congress. before we close to take us back to where we are today, i just want to recap that among the actions being proposed in this congress, there are some repeal s that -- repeals that, yes we're going to rise above them, but they're going to make things difficult for women across this country, eliminating of funding for the title 10 family planning program, these are cuts being proposed in the c.r. for the rest of 2011. eliminate the funding for the program that's provided family planning, breast and cervical

cancer screenings and preventive health to low income women. they propose to eliminate all federal funding for planned parenthood arks you heard, and cut nutrition programs for pregnant women and their children, to cut head start, child care, to cut job training, to cut funding for college. all of these are going to make it much harder for our young and our older women to do what gwen's mom did and move themselves up the educational ladder and help to provide a bridge for the youngsters that come behind. they plan to cut funding for college and pell grants. to halt the implementation of the health care law that as you heard will do so much for not just women but for all americans, those who are insured and those uninsured. it will cut maternal and child health funding and funding that

helps schools comply with title 9. the c.r. that's proposed, the long-term c.r. for fiscal year 2011, also cuts funding for social security offices and support to senior programs as the majority of social security recipients are women and of course are elderly and many are poor. all of these programs and others on the chopping block, that are on the chopping block and women will be greatly and adversely impacted by them. as we honor the history of women in our country this month, let us not celebrate it with an assault on women and their families, let's not make it more difficult for minority women, for seniors, for small businesswomen, for the many who need these necessary supports if they are to be part of the vibrant future that we envision for our country. these cuts make any praise of women's month by our republican

colleagues emply lip service. at a time when women are vulnerable because of the economic cries aand when we immediate the programs that they are planning to cut, we need those programs more than ever. in this month dedicated to women we are calling on the leadership of the 112th congress to continue to build, not to tear down, but to build on the gains we made for women and for all americans in the 111th congress. do not turn back the clock to a time that none of us want to go back to. do not turn the clock to a time our country cannot afford to go back to if we are to be the number one country in this world. we, the members of the congressional black caucus, dedicate this hour to the women of african decent, those known and unknown, on whose shoulders we stand, the sturdy bridges that brought us to where we are today, to them we dedicate this hour and dedicate ourselves and our work on behalf of families an children, african-american

and all americans here in this country and around the world. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and i move that we now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly the house stands a

>> they have done now five short term measure is and this one will be the sixth. >> what did house majority leader erich kantor say about the status of negotiations for government spending through the rest of this budget year? gregg's he complained that he had not heard much from the white house or from senate democratic leadership in terms

of what kind of bill they would support to fund the government for the rest of the year. >> we heard from congressman of ohio today. he is the chairman of the conservative republican study committee. he says he plans to vote against the measure. what are his reasons? >> key and several other conservative house members have announced they are going to vote against it. basically they either object to the fact that the short-term measure does not include writers that would include the founders for planned parenthood. these are long-term measures that house republican support. those have not been on the short term measures because if they were they would probably i could

pass by the senate. they object to them not being there and they are also saying, we need to cut deeply and we need to get this done. the short-term measures are just cutting $2 million a week and that is not enough. >> almost certainly no. is almost certain to pass the house and the likely to pass the senate. >> had to democrats feel about plans to cut spending by $2 billion? >> the democrats are going along with it. a couple weeks ago when the last short term passed the house there were more democrats that voted for it than against it.

in the senate, just about all the republicans voted for it. >> what is expected to happen in the senate once the short-term bill comes? >> it is a good question. assuming the house passes the short-term bill tomorrow, it will go to the senate. the senate is likely to pass it. there will probably be strong support for ed in the senate, but it is possible they will not pass it by midnight friday. in that case the government could shut down next week. >> appreciate your time. coming up next, the head of the

nuclear regulation talks about the safety of the japanese nuclear power plants. the house rules committee works on a short-term spending measure that will be on the floor tomorrow for a vote. president obama on changes to the education department's no child left behind policy. >> you can listen at c-span with itunes or on your mp3 player. people in the news on newsmakers. an interesting conversation on "q & a." everything you need to know is online at c-span.org. >> an update on the nuclear reactors in japan after last week's work -- earthquake and

tsunami. the head of the commission and deputy energy secretary spoke to reporters at the white house for 25 minutes. >> good afternoon. over the weekend the president was briefed multiple times on the situation in japan on the earthquake there. usaid is leading our humanitarian efforts with the department of energy and nuclear regulatory commission. in national security adviser is coordinating a process with regards to japan and the engaging with officials across the government. he is keeping you -- we know you

have a lot of questions with regard to nuclear issues. you keep answering questions about american citizens in japan as well as generally of date americans about the impact of the accidents or the aftermath of the tsunami and earthquake. i also have our deputy secretary of energy. we can at mind everything we're doing -- al everything. i will ask these two gentlemen to speak. if you could address questions related to them and we will let them get out of here and i will take questions on other issues. thanks very much.

>> we believe the steps the japanese are taking are consistent with the approach we would use here in the u.s.. we advised americans in japan to follow the instructions of the japanese government with regard to nuclear facility. the agency has been providing technical assistance. we have dispatched two technical experts to japan and are continuing to assemble a team of experts that would be dispatched. i will then turn to dan.

>> thank you. we have been working closely with our colleagues here at the department of energy. i just came from speaking with the secretary on this matter. john brennan has been coordinating the interagency. we have had frequent meetings. we have also been in continuous consultation with the ambassador. hats off to him for the response. and we have been making sure we share information with the chairman and our colleagues at the nrc. we focused our efforts on consulting with our japanese

colleagues. we have dispatched subject matter experts on emergency response. we are in consultation with him. we will make sure any requirement they have if we are prepared to meet. we are talking to them on a real-time basis. we have expertise already there on the ground. we have additional capabilities. the japanese government has tremendous capabilities on their own but this requires our best efforts. >> i will go ahead and call on people give >> can you give us a sense of how president obama is getting briefed about this nuclear crisis? can you describe the nature of what we are seeing and how bad

it is? >> let me just say the president was briefed more people times over the weekend. he has been briefed this morning. john brennan is taking a lead on that. >> in terms of the second part of your question, it is a serious situation in japan. are the efforts of the japanese government -- is to continue to look for ways to provide the ability to keep the reactor school. that is a process that has been ongoing for some time. we continue to bribe -- provide assistance where we can. we have asked for additional

types of equipment to ensure the reactors continue to be cool. >> has there been a partial meltdown with any of these reactors? >> we don't have detailed information about the nature of the core and the reactor but there has been a loss of the normal type of cooling mechanisms to the reactor. add the -- as the situation develops we will get better information. the focus has been to do everything possible to insure the reactor continues to be cool. >> is this leading to any security concerns at nuclear reactors in the u.s.? >> we are always focused on the security of this country. whenever there is any new information we always take that into consideration and make

changes. right now we believe nuclear power plants operate safely and securely. >> is there any attempt to assess the study of the ability of the plants to withstand an earthquake? at least one of the reactors uses that mox fuel. is there more concerned about that? >> with regard to the u.s. power plants, they are designed to high standards for earthquake affects. all our plants are designed to withstand significant natural phenomenon like earthquakes and tsunamis. we have a strong regulatory

structure in place right now but as we always do we will continue to see if there are changes we need to make with our program. with regard to the fuel, we are providing assistance to the japanese. they have not asked for specific information. >> you just talk about how there are high standards domestically. what are the differences between what japan has and what the u.s. has? >> our focus is always on keeping the nuclear power plants secure. we are providing technical expertise to the japanese as they request it. this is something we will deal with them the road but we believe that the plants continue to be designed to a high

standard for tsunami events. >> [inaudible] there are already calls for moratoriums in the u.s.. does the president know about these calls? what is the time line for that? >> we will always take whatever steps necessary to ensure the safety of nuclear power plants. right now we have a strong program in place. as we get more information from japan as this crisis comes to an end we will look at whatever affirmation we can gain from this event and see if there are changes we need to make. following the 2004 tsunami we

reviewed sonometer requirements for nuclear power plants and the nature we would be able to deal with that type of event. >> will plants in the u.s. be able to understand -- withstanding an earthquake of this magnitude? >> i don't want to speculate on anything like that. >> [inaudible] are they still built to withstand an earthquake of this method? >> we have a strong safety program in place to deal with seismic events that are likely to happen at any nuclear facility. when we continue to provide

support we will gather information about the specifics of the event. i don't want to speculate about what were the relevant factors in japan. >> is that based on conditions of those plants were based on a partial meltdown? would that change your assessment? >> this is based on the nature of these reactors and the large distances with any u.s. territories. you will not have any radiological material that could present any risk. >> even with a meltdown you will not have harmful radiation reached hawaii? >> i don't want to speculate but

based on the distances it is on likely there will be harmful in packs. >> do you worry about an overreaction in this country in terms of policy-makers running away from nuclear energy? >> i would refer to him. >> you heard clearly that we place safety paramount and always will. we have to have an energy policy that is driven by our overall assessment of our country's best interest. we will seek to diversify our energy supplies and make sure every one of those sources is as safe as possible. we will take this into account as we proceed from hypothetical set. there is nothing new about it.

each event as it occurs is taken into account but we don't change from day to day. >> nuclear is a key component, correct? >> nuclear-powered has been a critically important component. we have 104 operating reactors. 70% of energy comes from nuclear power. reducing nuclear power is important to build a low carbon future we will take the safety aspect as paramount concern. the nrc which is independent

and at arm's length will ensure we live up to this high standards the president expects us to use. >> it is critical to reaching your mission goals. >> we see this as an important component to the portfolio we are trying to build. >> the moratorium issue. [inaudible] does the administration agree with that? >> i am happy to start and others [inaudible] >> going back decades every experience we have we take into account. back in march 1979 there were tremendous amount of things we

applied to the improvement of safety. our reactors are much safety today. we hypothesize new scenarios of different types and never stop our efforts to exercise our capabilities and to ensure our operators can act as safely as possible pri we will apply those as well we know that in terms of operating -- that is irresponsibility that will be proposed in the regulatory commission. from a policy perspective we will continue to operate our reactors safely. we will seek to build nuclear into part of a responsible

energy future to make sure we only do so to the extent it can be done safely. >> we have the plans we have already in operation that provides 20% of the electricity. and for mission is still coming in from japan. these gentlemen have made clear they will incorporate that into how we view safety and security and nuclear energy as a resource. it remains a part of the hesident's energy plan when talks about reaching clean energy standards. as we get more information, that can be incorporated. right now we remain committed

to clean energy standards. >> [inaudible] >> do you have nrc people [inaudible] >> we have two technical experts in japan. they are working to provide information to the u.s. embassy and interface with their colleagues. >> from your understanding of the situation with the japanese reactors, will it get worse? >> i don't want to speculate on how this may progress. it is a serious situation. we continue to provide whatever is requested from us by the japanese government. japan is a technically advanced

nuclear country. they possess significant resources on their own. >> the president has not seen anything in japan that would change his position? >> this is information still coming in. these gentlemen have addressed the issues of safety and security of the energy program. 20% of our electricity is generated by nuclear power. >> i think the point that has been made is we are an independent regulatory authority. we always keep focus on the

safety and security of nuclear reactors. if we do get information that will cause us to take action we will take at, but we don't have any information that would cause us to do anything different with the current reactors. >> of those two technical advisers, are they in tokyo or getting information from the japanese government? how would you describe the japanese government's description of what is going on? are they being forthcoming with the public? >> our experts are in tokyo providing assistance to the u.s. embassy and interfaced with our japanese counterparts. we continue to provide assistance. >> are you getting technical

informations from the japanese? to what extent are they hearing what is going on? >> they give us direct information from japan about what is going on. that is coming from a variety of sources. >> has the government been cautious about what it is putting out? they did not have much urgency at the beginning and it has gotten more urgent. >> we continue to see an aggressive effort to deal with a difficult situation in japan. >> we have been in consultation to ambassadors with the chief cabinet secretary. we have two subject matter

experts and they are in communication with counterparts. >> are they providing any actual equipment? >> we are ready to provide equipment. we have talked about what they have. as of this morning there may be additional informational, but we are making sure they have a lot of equipment on their own -- we have equipment that can do ariel monitoring. we have emergency response equipment available. we are not starting with a blank slate. we have what we need to supplement. >> [inaudible] has there been any direct impact from that on the u.s. support teams already in the area? have they had to alter their

plans at all? >> i would defer that to aid. the two nrc officials have not experienced any issues but their safety is important to us. in tokyo, there is no direct impact from the nuclear incident. >> can you talk about the logistical challenges? >> i would defer some of those two the folks at aid we have been working with to -- >> our people have not been impaired and their ability to reach unto our japanese counterparts. we are sending another technical expert to join the team.

in the context of the coordination mr. brennan has been doing, we are working closely with colleagues in the pentagon to make sure any assets need to be brought in there. >> we will take one question. >> [inaudible] what are the japanese doing? >> the first crisis is getting the coolant to the reactors. they are making sure that

remains cooled properly. from a u.s. perspective, we are closely evaluating our options and the mechanism here is president obama convened a panel chaired by mr. lee hamilton that group will be looking at all the options for the u.s. and by july we will come back with interim use on the actions we ought to think about. i'm sure they will be taking all the experiences into account >> [inaudible] >> in terms of japanese nuclear waste i would refer you to the japanese regulatory authority. >> i appreciate it.

we will move on to the rest of the briefing. >> general david petraeus will be on capitol hill tomorrow to give his assessment on the security situation in afghanistan. the u.s. will begin withdrawing forces this summer. live coverage at 9:30 a.m. eastern on c-span3. also on c-span3, the assistant secretary of the navy will testify about u.s. military operations in the pacific. live coverage from the house armed services committee starts at 2:00 p.m. eastern. >> with current federal spending expiring friday the house and senate are working on another short-term funding measure. watch the debates in their entirety and see what your

elected officials are saying with complete heinlein's of every senate session at c- span.org. >> with the current short-term spending resolution set to expire, the how else will vote on a short-term -- house will vote on a measure to cut spending. the house committee met to work at the procedures for a floor debate. it is chaired by congressman david dryer. we will also hear from congressman harold rogers. >> i want to say we are here for a measure allowing for further appropriations for fiscal year 2011. we are very happy to welcome my good friend, the distinguishing

share on the appropriations. the ranking member is here as well. we thank both of you for the efforts you have put into this. it is always an honor for us to have the chairman and ranking member of the committee appear before here. without objection any prepared statement you have will appear in the record. we welcome your summary. in its entirety and we welcome your summary. >> mr. chairman, thank you very much for your service and this committee's service, so, mr. chairman, ranking member slaughter, and members of the rules committee, we are here to present res 48, the continuing appropriations resolution.

we would like a traditional rule on the cr to allow for timely consideration in passage so we can avoid a government shutdown. it's my hope that with passage, we will provide the necessary time to complete negotiations on a bill for the rest of this fiscal year. on a short-term measure, it's not the preferable way to fund the government. this bill is essential to maintain the critical programs and services that the american people rely on for three weeks until congress comes to a final agreement on the remainder of this fiscal year. while keeping the government running until aprille l8th this makes $6 billion in spending cuts, cutting $2 billion for every week of funding. within this cr 25 programs have been reduced or terminated saving the american people $3.5 billion, an additional $2.6 billion in earmark account

funding has been eliminated. many of these reductions and terminations have been supported by president obama in his annual budget requests as well as members of the senate. this cr is the third bill that the appropriations committee has produced this year that will reduce spending significantly continuing a trend of cuts that will put a dent in our massive and unsustainable deficits, and with the passage of this bill and the passage of the two-week cr previous to that, a total of $10 billion will have been cut from '11 spending which would make it the largest recision in the history of the congress. given the realities of our debt, the short time frame for action and the fact that many of these cuts have received bipartisan support in both houses as well as the white house, i anticipate swift passage of the bill so we

can continue negotiations on a final agreement, complete the budget process for fiscal 11, and move onto the important work for the next year. we're nearly halfway through the current fiscal year, and it's high time we complete this long overdue work left to us by the previous majority. thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much, mr. rogers. mr. dix. >> we are here this evening to consider a rule for hk res 48. this measure extends the cr until april 8th. the extension reduces spending in 2011 by $45 billion below the president's request. hr 48 also adds another $6 billion in common ground spending reductions. in total the measure cuts $51 billion below the president's request. the idea behind the three-week extension is to provide an opportunity for the house, the senate, and white house to settle all outstanding issues on fiscal year 2011 appropriations.

i'm hopeful that negotiations will succeed. lurching forward under a continuing resolution facing the possibility of a shutdown every two or three weeks is not the best way to proceed. i think we all agree on that. and so i regret that we are here before you once again, mr. chairman, discussing another temporary funding pressure that includes serious reductions in appropriations for fiscal year 11 which now must be implemented in 6 1/2 months that remain before the next fiscal year begins. and, again, i still have concerned about the economic impact of these cuts, but i think this cr has to be enacted. >> thank you very much, mr. dicks, and i thank both of you. and i think that it is -- we've had this ongoing debate on the issue of the impact of spending cuts on job creation and we are on a different side on that one. i believe getting our fiscal house in order will go a long way towards encouraging job creation and economic growth.

while you may be sorry to be here, i'm sorry that you have to be here, but it is, as i said, always nice to see both of you. mr. sessions? >> thank you, mr. chairman, and welcome to both of you, hall and norm. it's good to see you again. we don't want to make a habit of doing this, i'm sure, but here we go. >> we want to do our regular appropriation bills for 2012. >> you know, i think that that will be -- you'll be welcome, very welcome then when you do that, norm, and congratulations on your new job. >> thank you. >> and you working with chairman rogers on this in such a fo forthright way. there's been a question about that $105 billion worth of obama care that's sitting out there. is that in 2011? that they're in reference to? would that be covered in any way under this measure? >> those are authorization

matters. in order to get at them -- we can't do that on appropriations unless and until the authorizing committee paves the way for us. those are authorizations and not subject to appropriations. >> so that $100 million is in this 2011 budget? i was led to believe maybe they were over a series of years that really we're not addressing. >> are you talking about the $105 billion? >> right. >> well, as i understand it, in the obama care bill that passed and became law, there are different events that take place in the future that triggers spending. by the authorization bill, not the appropriations bill. >> right. >> now, in the hr-1 that we

passed in the house three or four weeks ago, the big continuing resolution for the rest of the year, there are provisions in that bill that does cut off obama care funding. >> for '11. >> $100 billion, if i said million, i meant to say billion, the $105 billion then is simply in not the appropriations, simply in the authorization that's moving forward. >> and it's over a course of time. >> and then -- which is really what i was trying to get at. the 14 through 19 -- >> but if we pass hr-1, if the congress passesh r-1 and the president signs it and it becomes the law, '11 funding, this current year for obama care, would be terminated. the appropriations portion of it. >> you know the status of that

bill at all once it left the house? >> hr-1? well, we passed it in the house by a rather substantial margin. we sent it to the senate for them to give us their bill. they haven't done that yet. we're still waiting for the senate to lay a bill on the table. now, they did have votes rejecting both hr-1 and a bill that their appropriations committee came up, with voted no on both. >> effectively the house is on record saying we want to in a majority vote, we want to defund all of obama care for at least 2011. already done that and sits. >> well, the house has. >> we're waiting for the senate. how can you negotiate with yourself? >> it is an interesting proposition. thanks for both of you for being here. yield back. >> miss slaughter. >> thank you, mr. chaurirman. you are negotiating, are you not? >> conversations are going on.

>> that was my understanding. you just said sort of indicated to me that you were negotiating by yourself, but i don't know that to be true. there were votes on both bills, the house and the senate bill went down as did hr-1, not enough votes for either one of them. i think like everybody else here, i don't like slouching toward the end here about funding the united states government in two-week and three-week intervals. that really does not become us very much. at the same time i want us to be very careful that we don't cut things to the bone. there are a lot of things in here that concern me, but i understand that we have to get on with it and everybody on my side seems to have signed off on this, but we would like to have an open rule. we would like to be able to contest some of the things in here, but i don't think that's going to happen either.

so let me be the third to welcome the two of you back to the committee. thank you very much for coming. >> thank you very much. mr. chairman, if i could take a moment to mr. sessions question about the $105 billion and the obama care funding. let me give you a prepared statement that i think sums it up better than i perhaps have. hr-1 terminated all discretionary funding for obama care, the bill that passed the house. every dollar for obama care that was available for the committee and the house to eliminate was swept up and taken out through both the underlying bill and through multiple amendments that occurred on the floor. any other spending for obama care is mandatory, not the jurisdiction of the appropriations committee and, therefore, can't be addressed through crs or any other appropriations bill. it's now up to the authorizing committees to do what they can

to address this mandatory spending and remove the remaining taxpayer funds for this job killing law. that i think clarifies it perhaps better. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i want to be number four to say thank you very much to boept of you as i expressed to you on the floor last week, i know both of you have been working extraordinarily hard this session in working on the continuing resolution, and i think it wears repeating several times that what you are doing, and mr. rogers, you said this sort of at the tail end of your comments and perhaps in a little bit lower voice, that basically what we're doing now is repairing what was not done last year because our colleagues across the aisle did not pass

the appropriations bills last year, we are doing our best to keep the government running. i think that for many americans they don't quite understand that. we use terms like cr and assume everybody understands that, but it is the continuing of what was funding for the year 2010, and i think it's extremely important that we point that out. we haven't gotten into the appropriations process, as mr. dicks said, for the next year, but we're really consumed by taking care of this, and there were votes on the legislation we sent to the senate, and there was a vote on the senate's cuts which i think were $6 billion, ours was $51 billion, and it's my understanding that the bill from the house got two more

votes than the senate bill got. >> our cut was 61. >> 61, right. and i do think, again, that it's important to explain that everything we could -- you could do, the appropriation committee could do to cut the funding for what we call obama care has been done. >> that's correct. >> i think that really needs to be said over and over and over again. >> i have said it over and over again. i'm afraid -- i hope i'm not boring people with saying it, but it's true. and the gentle lady is absolutely correct. the reason we're here is that last year when the democrats controlled the house they didn't pass a single appropriations bill out of the 12, and we came to january when the republicans took over in the house, and the democrats had passed a continuing resolution to continue the government until

march the 4th -- >> from october 1 to mamrch the 4th. >> from the beginning of the fiscal year, october 1, to march 4th simply because they hadn't passed an appropriations bill. they passed this catch-all bill to keep us going. we came into power, if you will, with that laying on our lap and so we've been trying to keep the government going even while we're trying to cut exorbitant wasteful spending, and that's why we're here. >> and the other point, you mentioned discretionary spending and mandatory spending and appropriations and authorizations. again, those are terms we throw around here that we think people know, but mandatory spending is something congress established that cattory many years ago when congress didn't want i think to deal on a year-to-year basis

with how to appropriate money for certain programs, and they're just on automatic pilot, and again i think most people don't understand that. that a huge segment of what we spend is on automatic pilot. >> two-thirds of it is automatic pilot. we appropriate maybe one-third at lost of the annual budget and more than half of that is for defense. so we're left with roughly 15% that we're cutting from here. >> right. and i think the other thing that probably should be pointed out is that there will be under consideration in various subcommittees of appropriations moving some of the spending for obama care that's in mandatory category into the discretionary category. am i correct about that? >> the gentle lady is absolutely correct. we have already begun hearings on the '12 bills.

we have held maybe 60 subcommittee hearings in all 12 subcommittees. and during the '12 process, during these hearings that we're having for next year's bills, efforts will be made to take out the obama care spending for next year, the ones that we can that are appropriated funds, and then those funds that are in that bill that sort of go off automatically by the law in years to come, if we can convert those mandatory requirements in the law to where they're subject to annual appropriations, then we can disappropriate those funds. >> one more comment, mr. chairman, and i'll be done. we have voted on a bill to repeal obama care. we did that. we have voted to take out all the funding for obama care

that's in discretionary funding. >> that legally we can do. >> right. >> we have a plan to move money that's in mandatory category into discretionary category so we can cut that next year. so basically under the rules with which we operate here in the congress, we have done everything we know to do up until this point and we're planning to do more in the future to defund that program. >> the gentle lady has said it better than i have. >> well, i want to thank you -- >> if i could just make a comment. >> certainly. >> you know, there's still the senate that has to pass these things and the president has to sign them into law. so i appreciate all the self-congratulations here, but the chances of this becoming law are de minimis at best and i think it's time to focus on trying to work this thing out, get an agreement on '11, and

lets start working on '12 and let's do our job and not fantasize about what you're going to do on obama care. >> well, mr. dicks, thank you so much -- >> i just couldn't help myself. >> thank you for pointing out that the house -- the republicans in the majority in the house are not the majority all over washington. there are other people who are affecting this, and i would like to say, mr. chairman, there's a group of young women in here from the public leadership education network. their first time to be in the rules committee, and then they're going to go see votes, and they're from all over the country. i haven't identified exactly where, but i do want to point out that one of the -- the great niece of one of our former colleagues is here, miss regula

is here. >> he was a member of the appropriations committee and chaired a subcommittee. >> interior. >> please give him our best and thank you very, very much for being here. >> thank you, mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> very strongly. he believed in earmarks. >> mr. mcgovern. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. and again i want to welcome both of you back to the committee. and it really is interesting to reflect on the speeches we've heard. i agree with mr. dicks that we need to get down to business and deal with reality and not fantasy but it is somewhat incredible to me to have so many of my friends on the other side to take gle in the potential or the thought of cutting health care programs that will provide people health care. >> for 36 million americans. >> for 36 million americans, and

maybe that's where they think the majority of the american people are. i just don't believe it, and, you know, i also find it somewhat offensive that the president of the united states' name gets denigrated in the way that it constantly does by referring to it as obama care as if it's a swear word. it's a health care reform bill to try to provide millions of people in this country health care and i propose very muhope don't succeed in cutting benefits to people because health care reform is not a job killer. providing people health care actually will help create jobs and actually save money in the long term. the other thing is that -- >> cbo said i think it was like $257 billion over the next ten years would be saved by having this law stay in place. that's caused a few stirs. >> and i appreciate the fact

that, you know, we need to figure out a way to continue to have the government operate for the next few weeks, but at some point -- i mean, this really is kind of the third sierra. you had the hr-1, we had a cr that you passed for two weeks, now we're going for a third cr. at some point you have to take responsibility and it's on your watch, and -- >> well, if you'll yield. >> yes. >> that's because your party didn't pass any of the 12 appropriations bills for this year. >> well, as you know, we could have gotten a long-term agreement, but we had the republicans in the senate who refused to cooperate. having said that, you know, i think the deal right now is that you can only blame last year so many times. this is the third time up to bat. i hope it's the last, but i mean i'm not going to bet the house on that fact, and i think part of the problem is what you

passed in hr-1 is so extreme that you have even some of your own party in the other body who are somewhat uncomfortable with that, and so at some point i think we need to cut a deal with reality and try to get a long-term bill passed. >> if you would talk to your colleagues in the other body -- >> well, you know -- >> tell them to lay an offer on the table. we passed a bill, they haven't. >> i just came back from my district, and i'll tell you mayors and city managers all say the same thing, we can't plan for this year. you talk about jobs, creating jobs, we can't inl plement what we thought we had for this year. they're worried about their community development bloc grant monies, worried about programs that quite frankly, you know, provide and create opportunities in cities and towns across the country. they're not sure if hr-1 is real and if it is they're in one spot or whether there's going to be a compromise.

this kind of drip, drip, drip of continuing resolutions is a disincentive for job creation back home and i just hope that this is it. i hope that -- you know, and we can blame last year's congress all we want, but the fact is it's on your watch now. we're here -- >> look, we've passed a bill. we've made our offer. >> what you passed though is a bill that was so extreme there's no -- >> come back -- if you consider it extreme we'll have a chance to talk but we can't talk if you don't put something on the table. >> well, you told mrs. slaughter you are, in fact, talking with the senate and my hope is that there will be some agreement that there needs to be some moderation on your side so we can get something that can pass. the other thing people complain to me about, they ask the question did anybody in congress ever do a hearing as to what the impact of some of these cuts are going to be? and the answer is no.

i mean, put a bill together, brought it to the floor without any real thought to what the implications of some of these cuts would be. >> look, we debated that bill for four days, 90 hours, 600 amendments. you were a part of it. >> right. and some of these important issues were debated for ten minutes, but the reality is kind of the free for all we had on the house floor, you know, is not a substitute for thoughtful committee hearings -- >> you're saying we weren't thoughtful. >> i'll tell you, i look at that process and don't -- i would call it a lot of things. i wouldn't call it thoughtful in my opinion, and anyway, i hope this is the last time, but this is your third time. this is the third time here, and at some point i think you're going to have to take responsibility for whether we move forward or we don't. >> thank you. let me just say over the last

four years, we've had an 84% increase in nondefense discretionary spending -- >> well if the gentleman would yield, i think the questions i'm getting back home is did anybody -- when they propose cuts to the national institutes of health, has anybody did a hearing on what that means and how that holds up research? >> if i can reclaim my time, let me say that the gentleman knows that no one is proposing cuts in the national institutes of health. when you have an 84% increase in nondefense discretionary spending we have had a doubling to the nic and the notion of paring that back -- >> we are paring it back. >> is part of the message sent by the american people as the right thing. let me recognize mr. -- >> i would argue that -- >> mr. bishop. >> -- that it creates jobs as well helps deal with some terrible problems that people are dealing with right now. >> can i reclaim my time?

thank you. i appreciate that. let me be number six to welcome you here and apparently number six to hope you don't come back without a 2012 budget. >> until we get the '12 bill. >> yeah, until 2012 is available. i don't want to expand our suggestion into a different area although i think i will with this comment. i was in the chair when the question of the use of the term obama care came to the floor, and as it was discussed at that time obama care is not either a pejorative or a complimentary term. it's just a term of art similar to reaganomics or the bush tax cuts. if obama care was considered to be somewhat derogatory it would have to mean the underlying bill that created obama care would have to be derogatory. so i think that was the ruling we had on the floor at the time. i think it's an appropriate one. it simply says we build into terms what we want to build into terms but it does not

necessarily have to be in that particular way. appreciate you being here. and like i say, when i see you again, hopefully there's a new appropriations bill in your hand. >> thank you. >> mr. hastings. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. i'd ask either of my colleagues, i did the count, it was 11 republicans that said obama care and two democrats. now, i'm the third democrat to say it. while i agree with mr. bishop with regard to the pejorative nature perhaps of matters of this kind, the way it is intended and i'll echo the sentiments of my colleague, mr. mcgovern, the way it's intended by my colleagues when they say it, it's almost as if it's something nasty, and i for one would wonder what did you call what the health care program in america was before the democrats in the house of representatives and the united states senate passed a measure that took all too much time in my judgment to

do and did not go nearly as far as it needs to go. so what kind of care was it then? and what kind of care will it be when you do the paring back that you wish to assert and then we are wherever you take us backward and i don't know -- i guess it will be obama care light at that point because he'll still be in office with the kind of people you all are offering up to run against him. but things are very troubling. mr. rogers, you and mr. dicks do your jobs admirably, but the cuts that are proposed for this continuing appropriation amendment, the third in the series, the sixth time, do include some pretty substantial measures. and if i just went to one, $115

million in funding for the agriculture research service including a $44 million reduction for salaries. and a $71 million reduction in building maintenance. as one of several of us in congress that represents rural and urban areas in the congressional district we're privileged to serve, it's passing strange to me that we do not understand that the agriculture research services are going to have to recalculate based on this cut. and somebody is going to lose their job. now, it's fine for us to sit up here with jobs and put stuff on paper that's going to cost people jobs in these rough economic times. mr. dicks, you said that you're

concerned about other potential -- you didn't say potential, i have added the word, economic harm. what economic harm do you perceive happening and give me a low figure. no hyperbole, no exaggeration, no democrat/republican spin. just how many jobs will be lost by the best estimate, the lowest number of people that will lose their jobs based on what our colleagues on the other side are proposing? >> well, there's a range of opinion on this. mark zandi says it will be 400,000 jobs -- >> that's mccain's former economic adviser. >> 400,000 this year, 700,000 next year. economic policy institute says 800,0 800,000.

goldman sachs says it can go go -- up to 2.4 million jobs lost. my view is we're going to have a lot of government jobs lost, but also there's going to be a counter cyclical impact of these cuts, and with all due respect to the chairman and i have great respect for the chairman, had we not done the stimulus, unemployment today would probably be 11.5% to 12%. the stimulus did help -- every economist says it helped to drive down the unemployment rate, and what you all want to do is very noble. you want to reduce the deficit and you want to create jobs and restore the economy. i just worry that by cutting this much spending at this sensitive time in the recovery that it will have a negative effect and do just the opposite of what you're talking about.

you know, cut and grow -- >> of course i will. i appreciate the kind words. we had this discussion on the floor. the only correction i would offer to what you have said is when you said every economist, as you recall i have cited john taylor at stanford university who -- he was under secretary of the treasury for international policy. he has a completely different view, one which i happen to respect greatly on this. so i just -- >> as you remember i gave you six other stanford -- >> yeah, and you had the letter of the signatures and we have a similar letter that was provided with maybe not quite as many -- i think it was 150 economists. so again, i think it's important -- >> if i could reclaim my time from both of you, i know mr. -- let me say in advance some of these proposals are offered by president obama and let me say pointedly i disagree with president obama. what needs to happen here in this congress and in the white

house and especially in the other body is people need to sit down and recognize that in this country there's an enormous amount of pain where people are suffering, and we're up here with babble about what we're going to be doing. what needs to happen is we all need to be locked up up here until somebody comes out with some solutions, and there are solutions here, and among them are to try to be reasonable with each other as we go forward and figure out where we are with economic recovery. i don't need to have a master's degree or have a ph.d. in economics to recognize that if we're getting ready to cause a number of people on top of the people that are already out of work to be out of work and if gasoline prices are going to continue to rise and if health care prices are going to continue to rise and if wages are going to have a race to the bottom, then it doesn't take me a whole lot to recognize that

what we are doing is just hot air and -- i have one more thing i want to say, mr. dicks. until we address medicare and medicaid and social security, all of this is periphery and we ought to be busying ourselves dealing with that. japan has this enormous crisis that we jubs saw, and i heard one of the most sensible japanese women, i don't think she's anybody's expert. she was asked what will you do to recover? and she said, we will recover because we are a community, and we will pay the taxes necessary to recover. meaning rich and poor alike, and until this nation is prepared to do that, then we'll go around and around and spiral down. yes. >> the only thing i had add to that, what worries me the most in this are programs like wic, women and infant care.

we know that a poor woman who gets nutrition has a healthier baby. we spend $26 billion each year for premature babies that the hospitals have to take care of, which affects medicare, medicaid, every single program, and yet we're going to cut out a significant amount of money out of women and infant care. i mean, it's the social safety net, the vouchers for housing and those kind of programs, headstart, pell grants for these young people when they go to college are being reduced. we can do this in a more thoughtful way. the first round of the rogers amendment was -- i thought was tough, but it was not -- didn't take us to an extreme position. we have got to back off a little bit and find some middle ground here and save some of these important programs that are going to wind up hurting the

poorest of the poor and the president should be ashamed of offering up the community services block grant program. >> mr. chairman, mr. mcgovern asked for time and i won't take more time if you will permit me to yield. >> i appreciate it. i was trying to make a point when i was cut off that people need to understand that sometimes through investments you actually make, you know, you actually reduce costs in other areas. i was mentioning the national institutes for health. you find a cure to alzheimer's disease, the issue of medicaid and it's solvency will never be a problem again. find a cure to diabetes, find a cure to cancer. that's where we should be investing our dollars. it creates jobs, but if we can prevent human misery and on top of that, you know, be able to provide more solvency to some of these programs that right now are difficult, that's -- cutting

wic zwroosh he wic. >> head start. >> i think is heartless. >> and a lot of the educational -- >> let me say you all are my favorite team to work with. it could just be we've developed a better relationship. >> every monday we're here. >> i tell folks -- >> i feel like "dancing with the stars," don't you? >> i get to lead though. >> i don't see cynthia. >> and i talk to folks back home about that relationship that the two of you have. i tell the story, mr. dicks, the first time i saw you before the rules committee when folks on the committee were complaining they weren't able to get their amendments made in order and you said come to me and i will help you make this in order because if it's important to you, it's important to me and we ought to have a chance to talk about this on the house floor. we should talk about it on the house floor and we should do something about it if it's worth

doing something about. that made a big impression on me. >> i wasn't chairman last year. i was down the list. >> absolutely. and, you know, as a fellow who wasn't here at all last year, i'm troubled by some of the back and the forth about that because we need to take responsibility. i'm proud of the responsibility we've taken. there hasn't been a single easy decision your committee has been asked to make this year, not one, not one, and nobody sat around. and you can correct me if i'm wrong, i haven't heard anybody say we're on the appropriations committee and i'm not going to do it because it's not our fault we're in this mess. folks got down to work on day one and when folks came back and said we needed more, you got down to work again and again and again and here we are. i don't know. i'm glad you're in talks with somebody on the senate side, chairman rogers, and i don't know if you know mr. dicks, how it is we can spur that process along. how do you have a negotiation

with a body that hasn't passed a bill yet. >> i think you have to keep asking your leadership to engage. we have to ask the house leadership to engage, the senate leadership to engage, and the white house to engage. i mean, they've got to sit down in a room and work this out. this has gone far enough. >> and is that fair, chairman rogers? we've got a president who presented a budget. he presented his fy 11 budget and 12, presented both budgets. he's done, too. the senate, we passed hr-1 to get through the end of 2011 and the senate has done nothing. nothing last year, nothing this year. how do you work with that? >> what if the house had said we're not going to pass a bill. you guys need to talk to us? no, they say pass a bill, then we'll talk. and we say, okay, we've passed a bill. you pass a bill, we'll have something to go to conference with to work out differences and that's the way we do business. but the senate is just refusing

to act and, frankly, the white house has not been engaged fully in this process either. we're determined on our side of the aisle, we're determined not to have a shutdown. >> good. >> we want this government to continue. it needs to continue. so we're trying our best to get a fair and reasonable funding for the balance of this year so we won't have to shut down the government. i wish the other side would have the same sentiments. >> mr. dicks, do you have any expectation that the democratic leadership on the senate side will end up passing a bill of any kind or do you expect to have to go into negotiations with just ideas. >> my view of this is at some point the speaker, the president, and the majority leader are going to have to get in the room and come up with a number and then mr. rogers and i hope on a bipartisan basis can backfill the nments aumbers and put the bill that will put the

least damage to the country and we'll have a vote. it has to be a compromise. it's not going to be all or one. it has to be somewhere between where the house is and where the senate is. now, remember, we did -- even those the press just throws this out the door, we did cut $40 billion in the cr for the first cr that went to march 4th, from the president's budget request, $40 billion. so, you know, we think we should get a little credit for that, and then we've added this $4 billion and then the 6, and we're over $51 billion. that's halfway there. >> and those $40 billion -- >> and i think some compromise is going to have to be in order. >> those $40 billion go into the baseline now, that $40 billion from december is now in the cbo baseline going forward? is that right? >> we're $40 billion below the president's budget request for

'11 in what was put in the cr. >> but what happens with that $40 billion, with the $3 billion from -- or the $2 billion from -- $4 billion from three weeks ago, the $6 billion here. when we get together to start talking about 2012 and you all start talking about 2012, will those spending reductions be in a new baseline or are they assumed to continue in perpetuity or are they assumed -- >> it's just for the period of the cr. >> just for the period of the cr? >> well, whatever we finally come up with as the funding level for '11 in a cr that goes for the balance of the year, that becomes the baseline. >> and, remember, all these cuts have to be imposed in the last 6 1/2 months -- now it's going to be the last 6 months of this year. that's going to be painful. >> if we zero out the congressional office of rob woodall, is it assumed to

continue into 2012, 2013, 2014 or is it assumed to be reborn -- if i were an agency, is it reborn on october 1st, 2012, or does it get assumed as a zero in the cbo baseline? do you know the answer. >> it's a zero as long as it's zero until somebody appropriates money for it. >> so when we're talking about a $6 billion cr spending reduction today, is there a ten-year dollar value on that $6 billion that it's saving us in interest costs down the road and saving us in programs that are assumed to be -- >> it's just the three weeks. >> just the three weeks. okay. i'm thinking about reality and not fantasy. you know, the reality is there are folks who were sent up here to do some of these tough decisions, and it pains me to hear people talk about jobs, and

particularly to talk about community because i couldn't agree with you more, mr. hastings. i believe that we have robbed the communities in our districts with the nanny state, with a state that says don't you worry about it, we'll take care of it from washington, d.c. it steals dignity from those who need to be taking care of and steals dignity from those of us who should be doing the caretaking. >> would you yield to me? >> mr. chairman. >> let me try to properly put an answer to your question earlier about the baseline. the cr is a temporary -- whatever we come up with a temporary number. for fiscal '12 whenever the congress passes a budget resolution and passes that big spending number, macro number,

welling divide up that number amongst the 12 subcommittees, and that becomes the base figure for next year. >> and for purposes of beginning that budget process then, is the budget line starting from the 2011 request, is it starting from the cr passed in december, is it starting from the final cr that we passed here? what delineates the starting point for that budget resolution? >> it will be the bunt committees -- >> the president's budget is a recommendation to the congress, and then the budget resolution, if it's passed, when it's passed, that lays out the parameters. >> and that becomes binding on us. >> there has not been a single easy decision that's come across your desk. i don't actually expect 2012 to contain any easy decisions either, but i do want you to know how much i have come to appreciate the way that you all have worked together and helped

me to understand this process better. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it looks like we are successfully eliminating some of the funds that were designated for earmarks in several agencies, agriculture, commerce, justice, science, financial services, and interior. why are we not also eliminated earmarks in defense? >> i assume that -- well, this bill doesn't deal with dod. that, as you recollect -- in hr-1, there are four titles and dod was one separate title, and we merely plucked from last year's omnibus appropriations

bill the defense fortion of it. that bill never passed, but we took all the provisions from that bill and dropped them into hr-1 and that deals entirely with dod. >> are you are you saying that l doesn't have any appropriations for defense? >> i'm sorry. >> did you say this bill does not have any appropriations for defense? >> it's a continuing resolution so it continues at the ten levels. >> hr-1 is what we're talking about. this extends the conversation about hr-1 for three weeks. hr-1 contained dod funding. >> i'm talking about what this bill does, not what hr-1. maybe mr. dix can clarify. mr. dix? >> all i'm saying is this is a continuing resolution so this deals with the entire government. beit's at the '10 numbers. and we did a separate defense bill which is put into hr-1,

which the defense department and myself and mr. young all want to see enacted as part of the final agreement. so that's where that will go. and the earmarks -- the money for the earmarks will probably come out of that. to get to a compromise number, we're going to need that source. >> okay. so in the defense component of hr-1, you have saved money by eliminating the defense earmarks, is that correct? >> we cut it by 3 billion. i'd have to consult the numbers to find -- >> there may be some more there, but that would help us in the end game to get to a number that's a compromise number. >> but let me just say this. there will be no earmarks in whatever we do. >> well, there are earmarks in what we're asked to vote on this week. we're still continuing the defense earmarks while we're rolling back certain earmarks. there are earmarks in this cr. >> no, they're not.

>> they're not xoouting any of the eefr earmarks. >> in this three-week continuation, we do veto all earmarks -- earmarks are included in this bill -- are stricken in this bill. >> from several agencies. >> 2.6 billion, in agriculture, commerce, justice, science, interior. >> but defense is not listed on that list. >> as i say, defense is a separate title in hr-1. this is a continuation of the conversation about hr-1. >> so, again, while this does -- i mean, you can say that for any of the different areas, but it does actually ilt teliminate th earmarks in the listed categories. >> right. for three weeks. >> right. so -- well, and it also continues those categories of earmarks for defense, although i

think mr. dicks said nothing of that money will be spent pending a final deal. >> remember, we did take 15 billion out of defense in the 40 billion that we did in the original cr. so, i mean, that may be -- but i'm just saying from the obama budget request, which defense was 530 without mil con. we went at 515. that was something mr. young and i agreed to last year and was agreed to by others. >> but there is a provision in hr-1 that says, all previous earmarks have no effect in fiscal '11. and if you want to see the language, i have it here. >> the president has also said it he'll veto any bill with earmarks. >> so we're looking at a final budget deal including something along those lines where all the prior earmarks are removed, correct? all of them. clearly this cr is a step in that direction.

>> -- earmarks but leave the money there, too. that's another possibility. >> the money that would then -- >> be used for other purposes. >> it's money whether you use it for savings or whatever purpose. thank you. i yield back. >> thank you. to echo once again our thanks for both of you being here today. you know, when you look back in history, in particular in what occurred or didn't occur raft year in regards to what got us in this predicament right now as we're talking about a continuing cr, you know, my bigger concern is where are we going to be as relates to -- you don't want to keep going back, i'm sure you don't want to keep coming back every two or three weeks, not that we don't like you, i'd just as soon not see you coming back every two or three weeks. because the issue is much bigger. you have issues in regards to the fy '12 budget to hammer out

to get where we need to go. and i agree with you, mr. dicks, that obviously the speaker and the leader over in the senate and the president need to sit down and walk out of a room and come to an agreement in regards to where we need to be on this year's cr. because right now we're gnashing our teeth, pitting each other against each other as to what program is more important than the next. but at the end of the day, we're still struggling with the fact that we have to cut dollars currently being spent or allocated to be spent in this upcoming budget in this current budget we're in, '11. >> i hope that we can look at what we do and we have really an extraordinary staff, and on some of these really sensitive

programs, in the outcome, i hope we'll take care of some of these things like wic, for example. i just can't imagine cutting that program. >> the president recommended it. >> well, as i said, sometimes the president makes mistakes, too. wic is a program -- it's a congressionally created program. one of the most important programs there is. if you want to spend $26 billion a year on premature babies, we're going to have to pay the bill. it's pay me now or pay me later. i'd rather take care of the poor woman and have her have adequate food when she's pregnant so she has a healthy baby. >> if the gentleman would yield. >> yes. >> and i appreciate -- i do appreciate your comments and your passion in regards to what you're speaking on because there are faces behind all of these issues. but i've not heard a good solution yet as to how we're going to cut -- because every

program, i will say, you could stand and defend. there's no doubt in my mind. but how do we get to a point where we actually cut spending? there's -- every spending program there's a program attached to it. so we're going to have to make tough decisions. and the problem that i see -- what i've seen in the past is that there's been no decision made and it's been punted down the road in regards to coming up with the cuts that we need to make. for america to be successful and prosperous and to create jobs we've got to take responsibility. you know, the discussions we're having are serious discussions, the implications are serious. but we didn't get elected to make the easy decisions. anybody could do that. we've been elected to make tough decisions, realizing there's tough consequences associated with them. because if there weren't, anybody could do this.

>> well, on that point, if you'd yield, i think what the american people want is to see us get together and work out an agreement. that's what they want to see, and the polls are overwhelming on that. they want to see us work this out, not keep doing these crs. and you all get that. i get it. >> if you would yield back -- >> we need to work this back. >> if you would yield back. obviously, we're singing to the choir on some of this because we're working with two other portions of government that don't see it this way. so how do you get them to the table? i think that sooner or later the issues as it relates to continuing crs is going to become an issue that forces us to come to the table, forces those that are resisting the opportunities to make cuts in government and cuts in spending, it's going to force them to come

and actually have legitimate discussions in regards to working with folks like yourself. yes, sir. >> if the gentleman would allow me to respond. >> absolutely. >> the house is at the table. >> i agree. >> we passed our bill. we've laid it on our table. we're sitting at the table waiting to negotiate to try to get this over with and not close the government down. the other side is not at the table. they won't come up with a paper to lay on the table and say, here's what we think. so we're sitting there waiting for the senate to come to the table and the white house and say, let's talk. we're ready to talk. in fact, we're talking our ears off and it's to an empty room. >> i agree. it's like going to a dance without a date. it's hard to have a dance. >> there may be more going on than people realize. >> i yield my time. >> thank you, mr. chairman. the question i keep asking myself is, where are we even having this conversation? the reason we're having this

conversation is because last month we had the greatest deficit in the history of this country, $223 billion. why are we here? because over the last four years an 84% increase is about $594 billion of additional spending so here we sit having a conversation about $6 billion. having a conversation about finding a way to fix a short-term and long-term cr. the truth of the matter is, we've got to get serious about cutting spending and until we get there, we'll continue to have these conversations about a small part of the overall process. and i continue to hear the conversation around benefits for those millions of americans who need benefits. i don't disagree with that fact, that there are millions of americans that need benefits. i do disagree with the funding recommendations of those benefits. when we continue to take money from unborn americans in an attempt to provide benefits to the folks today, hence a $223 billion deficit, when do we finally realize that we are now taking away benefits from the

next generation of americans? unless with we get serious about taking a look at being financial responsible, we will never return to financial sanity. >> gentlemen, thank you very much for being here. appreciate it. we are always happy to see you, even though he we hope you don't have to make too many visits and we anxiously look forward to the full appropriations process. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> that concludes the hearing for consideration of hres-48 and we will distribute the rule now.

>> before we consider the rule itself, we would like to now consider the views and estimates on the president's proposed budget for fiscal year 2012 and the chair will be in receipt of a motion. >> mr. chairman, i move that the committee adopt the views and estimates on the president's fy 2012 budget and authorize its transmission to the committee on the budget. >> you've heard the motion of the gentleman. any discussion? if not, the vote occurs. the motion is agreed to. now we'll proceed to consideration of hj res-48. >> mr. chairman, amid the committee grant hj res-48, the rule provides for one-hour debate equally divided control by the chair and ranking minority member on the committee

on appropriations. rule waves all points of order against consideration of the joint resolution. provides that the joint resolution shall be considered as read. finally, the joint resolution provides one motion to recommit. >> you've heard the motion of the gentleman. any discussion? >> mr. chairman, i move the members have opportunity to offer amendments to this resolution and so we could have at least one truly open rule in this congress. >> i thank the gentleman for his very thoughtful amendment. if there's no further discussion, i'll urge my colleagues to vote no so we can move this matter expeditiously so the conversations can continue. the nos have it. the clerk will call the roll. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> no.

>> no. >> mr. mcgovern? >> aye. >> mr. hastings? aye. >> mr. chairman? >> no. and the clerk will report the total. the motion is not agreed to. further amendment ss? mr. sessions, those in favor say aye. the motion is agreed to. mr. wood all -- oh, you'd like a roll call on that? clerk will call the roll. >> aye. >> aye. >> aye. >> aey. >> aey of of of of of >> aye. >> no. >> no. >> no. >> aye. and the clerk report the total. the motion is agreed to accordingly the gentleman from georgia, mr. woodall will be managing for the majority. and mr. mcgovern for the minority. let me just say to members we'll be meeting at 3:00 tomorrow

afternoon for consideration on the two financial services members. yes, tomorrow at 3:00. >> what do we think about for wednesday? >> i'm not sure yet. we don't have a time set, but we have announced further legislation for the week and we'll look forward to letting you know when we're going to have a meeting. without objection, the committee stands adjourned.

[ recess ] >> on tomorrows "washington journal," we will continue our look at the budgets at entitlements. democratic congresswoman serves on both the budget and

appropriations committee. later, harry johnson of the alzheimer's association on the caregiver for those affected by the disease. the current 2011 spending resolution will expire on friday. the house will work on a new spending measure that will extend federal funding for three weeks. the house dabbles in at 10:00 -- gavels in at 10:00. live house coverage on c-span. president obama to date passed congress to rework the no child left behind law by the fall. the president's remarks are next on c-span. after that, in a discussion on public transportation in the u.s. >> sunday, april 3, starting at

noon. he has written over 25 books. joyner three ever conversation taking your phone calls, e- mails, a sunday, april 3 at noon. watched previous programs on booktv.org. >> please welcome -- president obama called on congress to change the no child left behind law. the president said he agreed with the goals of the bush airlock, but said that more resources are needed. this is about 35 minutes. >> i came to washington with one goal, to give every child in america the very best education

possible. walleye was optimistic about what we could accomplish, i never imagined that we would be where we are today. over the last two years, we have seen more change in our educational system then we have seen in the past two decades. that is due to the extraordinary courage of leadership of the man i'm about to introduce this morning. this president knows firsthand that if you work hard and did a good education, you can do anything. everything he and the first lady have is because of their education and their hard work. they're both incredible role models for all the students here today. that is one reason why i am still hopeful. he understands that we need to educate our way to a better economy. we cannot rebuild public

education on the same old system of rules and regulations. he knows we have a shared responsibility to change the rules, to limit excuses, and to hold ourselves accountable. because of his courage and commitment, we have saved 300,000 educators jobs. incentivize the 41 states and the district of columbia to dock staked driven college and career ready standards. encourage 13 states to alter a law to foster the growth of charter schools. supported 17 states and their efforts to reform teacher evaluation system. we all know there is much more work to be done. while no child left behind helped expand the standards and

accountability movement, there is so much more that needs to be fixed. many teachers complain bitterly about the emphasis on testing. principals hates being labeled as failures. superintendents say that it was not adequately funded. we need to fix it now and we cannot wait. [applause] 27% of america's young people drop out of high school. 1.2 million teenagers are leaving our schools for the streets each year. 17-year-old days are performing at the same levels in math and reading as they were in the early 1970's. just 40% of young people earn a two-year or four-year college degree. for our children and our

country, we must do better. we do not need another study. we must stop admiring the problem. we need action. the man committed to leading us forward knows that better than anybody. i would like to introduce to you my good friend, the president of the united states barack obama. [applause] [cheers] >> hello, everybody. hello. thank you. thank you so much. thank you. have a seat, everybody. it is wonderful to be here. i want to thank our principal. [applause]

superintendent of arlington public schools, patrick murphy. i believe that the arlington county school board is represented here. where are they? there they are over there. all doing great work. we have your own congressman jim ran here in the house. -- moran here in the house. and we have got somebody who i believe is going to go down as the finest secretary of education we have ever had, arne duncan. [applause] before i begin, let me just say that like all americans, i continue to be heartbroken the images of devastation in japan. all of you have been watching

the full magnitude of this tragedy unfolds. i want to reiterate that america's -- america's support for the people of japan. i said directly to the prime minister of japan that the united states will continue to offer any assistance we can as japan recovers from multiple disasters. we will stand with the people of japan and the difficulties ahead. isis had a chance to talk with some of your teachers -- i just had a chance to talk with some of your teachers and students who told me about your all school project. by getting students engaged in learning, you are teaching the kinds of skills about how to think and work together that young people are going to need in college and beyond.

that is what all of our schools need to be doing. in an economy that is more competitive and connected to the ever before, a good job and a good career will demand a good education. over the next 10 years, nearly half of all the jobs are going to require more than a high- school diploma. if you want a bright future, you'll need a college degree or advanced training. unfortunately, too many students are not getting a world-class education today. as many of the quarter of american students are not fishing caught -- high school. the quality of our math and science education >> behind many other nations.

america has fallen to ninth. we used to be first. we now rank ninth. that is not susceptible. turning -- that is not acceptable. the best jobs program out there is a good education. the best economic policy is one that produces more college graduates. [applause] that is why for the sake of our children and our economy and america's future, we will have to do a better job educating every single one of our sons and daughters. all of them. that responsibility begins not in our classrooms, but in our

homes. it begins with parents who are instilling in their kids not only a love of learning, but the self-confidence and a special the self discipline and work ethic better at the heart of success in school and success in life. we have got to work harder. young people, i am talking to you. idec couple of them at home. -- i have a couple of them at home. nobody is going to just give success to you. you'll have to earn it. you have to apply yourself. the that you will learn at home, first and foremost. but that is not where the responsibility and. all of us have a responsibility, not just as parents, but as citizens. giving our kids the best possible education.

for a long time, we were not sure about how to give it. there were a lot of arguments for a lot of years. some people thought it be just put more money in education, that would solve the problem. on the other side, they thought money does not matter. what we need is reform. there were those that argued that we should just dismantle the public education system altogether. rather than working together, both sides remained locked in a stalemate year after year. nothing much change. something began to happen in state and local school districts. instead of getting caught up in these still debates, people began to agree that we need both more money and more reform. we need more resources for the

schools, but we have to reorganize our schools are doing business. people began coming together, parents, students, teachers, reformers, local officials. we started witnessing amazing success stories all across america. there is a school in denver that went from being one of the worst schools in colorado to graduating 97% of its seniors last may. in cincinnati, a high-school went from handing out only one diploma for every five students to graduate 95% of seniors. our goal has been to build on these successes across america. we know what can work. two years ago, we started doing

exactly that, trying to figure out how we incentivize success by starting something, in a competition called raced to the top. prove you are serious about reform and we will show you the money. because it is a competition for less than 1% of what our country spends on education each year, raced to the top has lead over 40 states to raise their standards for teaching, learning, and student achievement. these standards were not developed in washington, but were developed by republican and democratic governors all across this country. .e've made enormous progress this is probably the most significant initiative that we have seen in a generation. we need to make sure we are reaching every child in america.

not just those in states or districts that take part in raising a child. that is why we need to continue this competition and we need to open it up. we're letting local districts apply. [applause] that is why we need to take the same bottom up approach when it comes to reforming america's most important education mall -- education law known as no child left behind. we have to reform of no child left behind. [applause] over these last few weeks, i have been traveling across the country talking with folks about education. we have been doing that for the last couple of years. what i have heard, but the rest

of my team has heard, loud and clear, from teachers and students and parents and communities, no child left behind got some things right and got some things wrong. the goals of no child left behind were the right goals. making a promise to educate every child with an excellent teacher, that is the right thing to do. higher standards, accountability is right. shining a light on the achievement gap between students of different races and backgrounds, that is the right thing to do. what has not worked is denying teachers, schools, and states what they need to meet these goals. that is why we need to fix no

child left behind. we need to make sure -- [applause] lead to make sure we are graduating students who are ready for college and ready for careers. we need to put outstanding teachers in every classroom and give those teachers the pay and support the desert. [applause] -- they deserve. i got some applause for that one. we need to hold a failing schools accountable, we need to help turn the schools around. in the 21st century, it is not enough to leave no child behind. we need to help every child can head. we need to get every child on a path to academic excellence. [applause] here is the good news.

i am proud of the commitments by democrats and republicans in congress to fix no child left behind, to make this reform a reality. they recognize education is an area were we cannot afford to drag their feet. our kids only get one shot at an education. we have to get right. that is why i am calling on congress to send me an education reform bill but i can sign into law before the next school year begins. before next year's school year. [applause] i want every child in this country to head back to school and the fall knowing that their education is america's priority. let sees this education moment. let's fix no child left behind.

[applause] last week, we got a reminder of why it is so critical that we reform the slot. according to new estimates, under the system no child left behind but in place, more than 80% of a school's may be labeled as failing. 80% of our schools, for at five schools will be labeled as failing. that is an astonishing number. our impulse is to either be outraged or skeptical. skepticism is somewhat justified. we know the borat of five schools are not failing. -- four out of five are not failing. what we are doing to measure success and failure is out of line.

the list of failing schools include schools under making extraordinary progress. yes, we still have work to do at this school to close the cheapen gap. -- the achievements gap. kenmore is thriving. you guys are doing great. you have more work to do, but you are doing fine. [applause] what this means though is we need a better way of figuring out which schools are deeply in trouble, which schools are not, and how we get the schools that are in really bad shape on track, how do we help provide

the tools to schools that one gets even better to get better. that way of measuring the success and failure, that is the first problem that we need to fix. instead of labeling schools a failure one day end the run-up are hands, we need to focus on the schools that need the most help. we need to hold our schools accountable for the success of every child. we need to make sure some of our best teachers are teaching at some of our worst schools. we need to reward schools and are doing the difficult work of turning themselves around. [applause] we will have to take a series of steps across a broad range of measures to not only targets are most troubled schools, but raise

expectations for all of our schools. first, we will have to fix how schools are labeled and identified. we have to do more than not. in recent years, 15 states have lowered their standards to make it easier for their kids to meet the targets set by no child left behind. think about that. when states say, let's lower our standards that we have an easy time passing the standards that we do not get punished under no child left behind. that makes no sense. that is inexcusable. instead of measuring students based on whether they are above or below an arbitrary bar, we need to said better standards to make sure our students are meeting one kirk -- one clear goal. there graduating and ready for college and ready for a career.

[applause] to know whether our kids are on track, -- i want to speak to teachers. i am not talking about more tests. i am not talking about teaching to the test. we do not need to know whether students can fill out -- we do need to know whether they're making progress. we do need to know whether they are mastering reading, math, and science, but also developing the kinds of skills, like critical thinking and creativity -- those are skills that will lead for the rest of their lives. [applause]

that does not mean that testing is going to go way. there will be testing, but the point is that we need to refine how we are assessing progress so that we can have accountability without the rigidity. accountability that is still encouraging creativity in the classroom. we also know that better standards, better curriculum will not make a difference without outstanding teachers. every day in this country, teachers are doing a heroic job for their kids. every day. [applause]

they're taking on the problems that follow students into class , come in early to rewrite lessons, spending hours after- school tutoring students. my sister is a teacher. in south korea, teachers are known as nation builders. i think it is time we treated our teachers with the same level of respect right here in the united states of america. [applause] if we are serious about treating teachers that way, if we're serious about educating all of our kids, we will have to fix no child left behind. it says teachers need to be

certified before they step into the classroom. certification can be an important measure of the quality of the teacher. we obviously want teachers to be well qualified. when the quality of the teacher can make or break your child's education, we need to make sure our certified teachers are outstanding. teachers who can reach every last child. what we need to do is a better job preparing and supporting our teachers, measuring their success in the classroom, holding them accountable. we will have to stop making excuses for the occasional bad teacher. we will have to start paying good ones like the professionals that they are. [applause] if we truly believe that teaching is one of the most valuable professions in valuable professions in society,