president reagan, a worse recovery than even what president obama promised us when he spent all those hundreds of billions of dollars of stimulus money. we have $13 -- 13 million americans out of work, our unemployment rate sky high and it's only -- the only reason it's come down a little is we have fewer people working in the work force than we've had for a quart of a toer a of a century -- for a quarter of a century. one of the strongest signals we can send to consumers and families and businesses to restore their confidence is make sure we understand america is going to get its financial house in order. republicans in congress are going to send a statement today that america will get its house in order. this vote today basically says we are not going to grant the president unconditional increase in how much america can borrow, here is a good reason why. we took a look at who ran up the debt for america over the years. this chart shows and we basically said, who controls the

purse strings? congress. we take a look at all the debt that's been incurred since world war ii and what it shows is that the debt held by the public, that's by people, by countries like china, like firms in the federal reserve board, 90% of the debt that's been run up since world war ii has been accrued by a democrat, 10% by a republican. that doesn't leave us as republicans off the hook. in fact, we're committed to lowering this debt and getting control of spending, but there is a special obligation by our democrat friends and the president to get this spending under control, to put discipline on the side of government, to restore some financial soundness , to in effect cut up the credit cards, that's what republicans are committed to do, that's what americans say we need to do as a nation, that's why a no vote on this unconditional debt increase is the right vote, not just for the country, but for our future. i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas yields back his time. the gentleman from michigan reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: how much time is on each side? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has 14 1/2 minutes. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 13 minutes. mr. levin: we have 14 1/2 minutes? the speaker pro tempore: correct. len levin i yield three minutes to the gentleman from maryland, the ranking member on the budget committee, mr. van hollen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for three minute. mr. van hollen: i thank my colleague and, ladies and gentlemen, this is a political stunt. i just heard our friend from texas on the republican side say republicans wanted to tear up the credit card. it was just a few weeks ago when the republican budget passed this house all but four republicans voted for it. let me show you what that did to our credit card. here we are. we are about $14 trillion in

debt. the budget, all but four republicans voted for, takes us up toward $23 trillion, $24 trillion in debt. $8 trillion increase in the national debt by passing the republican budget. so clearly this isn't about tearing up the credit card. what is this about? this is about threatening to default on the full faith and credit of the united states unless we put into place the republican budget, including their plan to end the medicare guarantee and to slash medicare benefits. that's what this is all about. they said, whoa, we're going to hold this whole thing up until we get our way. let me tell you what their way would do to seniors, and we've seen it before on the floor of the house. what it means is that seniors will be paying thousands and thousands of dollars more for medicare or getting their

benefits slashed beginning in 2002 and it gets worse and worse and worse so that by the year 2030 you're talking about seniors having to pay $12,000 more for their medicare because the support they're getting is going down while the costs in the private market, which the republican plan forces them to go into, go up and up and up. so while the cost they face go up and up and up, the help they get under medicare goes down, down, down and they're left holding the bill. what's been interesting the last couple weeks in connection with this debt ceiling debate is to hear these republican proposals to say, hey, don't worry about it. you know what? we'll pay china. we'll pay our overseas foreign creditors on their bonds. we'll take care of them, but guess what, we don't have to pay our full faith and credit and our obligations to america's seniors. we don't have to pay medicare. we don't have to pay social security, pay off the

bondholders, take care of them. but let's follow through on this plan to dess apate, decimate medicare. at the end of the day this is what it's all about. we all understand we have to get the debt under control. we're having negotiations with the vice president to have a balanced plan. but you're trying to force the republican plan, which newt impinge rich acknowledged the other day was a right-wing piece of social engineering until, of course, he was bludgeoned by the right wing to withdrawal his statement. he was calling the shots as it was. he said, you know what, this isn't such a good idea. and what's really outrageous about this charade is you are now threatening the entire u.s. economy in order to get your way on a radical right-wing medicare plan that's bad for american seniors. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan,

mr. levin, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: at this time i yield a minute and a half to a distinguished member from the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman from tennessee, mrs. black. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from tennessee is recognized for a minute and a half. mrs. black: thank you, mr. speaker. i came to washington because i knew we had a debt problem. but you know what, once i got here and i started getting all the facts, i realized that we didn't have a debt problem. we have a debt crisis. we are $14.2 trillion in debt, and you know what, that number is even hard to comprehend it's so large. over and over we hear from economists, both conservative and liberal, that we have less than five years to turn things around or the united states will sink under all this debt. we've seen what happened in greece and ireland and i reject that future for the united states. the time is now to fix this

because we're out of time and we have an opportunity to change for the good the way washington is spending. but it doesn't seem the other end of pennsylvania avenue thinks we node to change anything. they are happy to keep kicking the can down the road, but you know what, the road has run out. in fact, the administration and over 100 democrats in this congress want a straight up and down vote on the debt ceiling. well, that's what we're going to get today. and when this measure to raise the nation's debt limit fails, on the house floor tonight we will be sending the white house a message loud and clear, you will not get another blake check from us, mr. -- blank check from us, mr. president. that's why because i and 87 freshmen colleagues were sent to washington with strict orders, to change the spending cycle that is bringing our country down. and tonight the people back home will see -- mr. camp: yield an additional 30 second. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlewoman from tennessee has an additional 30 seconds. mrs. black: and we are acting for them. the american people will reject the ideal to reject a clean vote and so will the house tonight. enough is enough. the gig is up, mr. president. so now is the time to get serious. get serious about ending this debt, get serious about ending washington spending addiction, and get serious about getting this country back on track. i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back her time. members are advised to address their remarks to the chair and not each other. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: how much time is left, please? the speaker pro tempore: both sides have 11 1/2 minutes remaining. mr. levin: i now yield to a member of our leadership and to a member of ways and means committee, mr. becerra, a minute and a half. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is

recognized for a minute and a half. mr. becerra: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, the last thing we need right now is for our republican colleagues to play russian roulette with a recovering economy by threatening to default on america's bills and triggering an escalation of interest rates and mortgage rates that will have repercussions on every single american family and certainly on every sector of our economy. yet, that's what we have today. republicans have presented a bill that they have said they are going to vote against. so this whole charade, which is costing taxpayers money because we have to pay for the lights, for the printing, for all the members of congress and our staff who are working, we have to pay for this so we could simply send a message that we are going to vote no. "the new york times" further tells us today that republican leaders have, quote, privately assured wall street executives that this vote is a show. furthermore, they cite that an

executive from the u.s. chamber of commerce tells us that, quote, wall street is in on the joke. the reality is that wh our colleagues on the republican side are trying to do is furiously try to deflect the public's attention from what they recklessly tried to do to medicare, by ending it, because that is in their proposal, in their budget. they are doing everything they can to try to get people to stop focusing on the fact that seniors are being asked to pay for this debt by getting less when it comes to medicare and certainly every single american as they age into seniority as well. mr. speaker, every family in america has to balance its checkbook. they have to do so responsibly. they have to pay the mortgage and pay their credit card bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. becerra: congress should do the same and this is not the time to play jokes. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan,

mr. levin, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: before i yield to the gentleman from new mexico, i would just yield myself such time as i may consume and say that the medicare trustees have said that medicare goes broke in 2024. and so if you support an unconditional debt limit increase, as 100 democrats wrote to their leaders and ask be made a position of the democrat caucus, that does nothing about preserving and protecting medicare for the future. so i would say -- no, i will not yield. i will not yield. i control the time, mr. van hollen. and so i would say that by supporting an unconditional increase in the debt limit, as more than 100 wrote in to their leaders, again, it does nothing to preserve for the future. at this time i yield to the gentleman from new mexico one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new mexico, mr. pearce, is recognized for one

minute. mr. pearce: i thank the gentleman for yielding. in my district people ask, what is this vote about, this debt ceiling vote? so i've created a simple chart that says it as plainly as we can. we're spending $3.5 trillion in the country each year and we're bringing in $.2 trillion. it doesn't work for your pamly. it doesn't work for your business, and the not working for the country. in order to make up the difference we have to borrow that money, except that our bankers are saying no more, just as your bankers are saying no more. so we're printing the money to make this system work. it's a scheme that's not working. this chart in the upper right-hand corner says that the whole economy collapses about 2038. so o.m.b. and c.b.o. are saying that we must take care of the spending problem that we have in this country. that's what the debt ceiling is about. we have a law that says we can't borrow within a certain amount of money. if we just extend with know provisions with reform then we'll continue to spend this

much money every year we don't have. so let's take care of the problems. let's do structural reforms in the way we're spending our money, let's do structural reforms in our budget. let's get it under control so we don't give our kids a failed economy. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure to yield a minute and a half to a member of our committee, mr. neal. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute and a half. mr. neal: he said, let me tell you what this is about. i came from a memorial. 278 veterans. i represent a veterans hospital. that's what this vote is about. the gentlelady from tennessee, i wish she was here on january 20 of 2001 when that political party spent their day and night saying, yes, mr. president, to george bush. they went along with everything he said. they never even bothered to read article 1 of the constitution.

this vote is about one and one thing only. paying your bills. they ran up the debt and now they don't want to pay their bills. january 19, 2001, bill clinton said goodbye to the country. a $5.7 trillion surplus onhand. $2.3 trillion in tax cuts, a war in iraq over weapons of mass destruction, a drug prescription benefit called part d, and they're talking about who owes the bill. this is about responsibility. this is about those v.a. centers. this is about their men's and women in iraq that needs to be equipped with the best possible weaponry. this is about paying the credit card bill that has come in for what they did for all of those years. i would debate any member of the republican party, you choose the forum. in the house and the senate. and we'll go through what those

eight years were about. count me in. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: well, thank you. i'm certainly concerned about the last eight years but i'm more concerned about the last two. i think we have the third year in a row of trillion-dollar deficit. i'd like to introduce in the record the standard & poor's report on the united states debt. and quote from that report. and without objection. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. camp: because, and i quote, a very large budget deficit and rising government indebtedness in the past to addressing these is not clear. we've revised our outlook on the long-term rating from negative to stable, end quote. the path to addressing these is not clear. . we think it's essential we don't have an increase, that we have the structural reforms we so desperately need in this

country. we have 110 members of the other party wrote a letter saying we want an unconditional increase in the debt. just keep spending. don't bring any spending reductions or long-term reforms, keep going the way we've been going. ed is and poors says if we don't -- standard & poor's says if we don't address this issue -- what does it mean? it means buying a car or house is more expensive. certainly our ability to sell our bonds around the world will be very difficult to do and make that much more expensive. a downgrade in our debt limit would have the same impact as not increasing the debt limit at all, financial markets would be disrupted, borrowing costs would skyrocket, the dollar would plunge, driving up the costs of imports like gasoline and causing higher inflation and would wreak havoc on our economy. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, reserves, the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. levin: i yield myself five seconds. mr. camp, you were the ones

that said just keep spending. we don't say that. i now yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett, is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. doggett: today's vote represents just one more step in the republican effort to dismantle medicare. this condrived procedure demanding an extraordinary 2/3 vote right after the republican majority announces they won't vote for it is just a gimmick. you don't have to be much of a math whiz to know if you don't have half the votes in this body you probably are not going to get 2/3 of the vote. but it's not about the vote. it's about republicans who are withholding their support of an eventual necessary increase in the limit by demanding that any agreement on that include a weakening of medicare by imposing something like the ryan republican medicare voucher plan that they all voted for, or some other scheme to just let medicare wither on

the vine. republicans are willing to jeopardize the full faith and credit of the united states of america, exposing us to great potential economic harm. they think the president will once again yield to their ransom, as he did last december, by yielding on more tax breaks for billionaires. don't yield to this maneuver, mr. president, say no to gimmicks and say yes to medicare, one of the best programs ever initiated by this congress to assure a little retirement security. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. the chair would remind all members to address their remarks to the chair and not to the other party in the second person. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from louisiana. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. we're not talking about what the other side would contend as a joke. this is a serious issue and

rise in opposition to an increase in the debt sealing that would give the president another couple trillion to keep spending the way they have the last two years. mr. scalise: i think the americans realize that wild spending spree the president has been on the last two years has to come to an end and will have to come on the house floor where we'll invoke fiscal discipline. the other members want a clean vote and want another $2 trillion to keep spending, money we don't have. in fact, if you look at their plan, their plan not only will double the national debt in five years, which i guess they're ok with, but also allows medicare to go corrupt -- bankrupt. we're not going to sit by and let medicare go bankrupt or let them keep spending money we don't have. we're going to say enough is enough. we'll put spending controls in place and frankly would be irresponsible to increase the debt ceiling without reforms that actually start cutting spending and putting our country back on a path to a

balanced budget. now, there may be some on the other side who don't want to see us get to a balanced budget which is why they dramatically increased spending over the last four years up until when speaker pelosi was fired. but frankly, the american people said enough is enough, stop the spending binge. enough of giving the president this uncontrolled use of the american credit card. let's start reigning in spending. let's put those controls in place. let's get this country back on a path of fiscal sanity so we don't have groups like s&p saying they'll downgrade the bond rating of the united states. and maybe the gentleman on the other side might want to and during your time you'll have an opportunity to address that. >> i'd like to ask you a question. mr. scalise: we need to start installing fiscal discipline in this house and we're doing it now and it means no more blank checked and no more unbridled spending. the president will have an opportunity to join us in that debate but frankly it starts tonight and we're saying we're

not going to keep giving the credit limit. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure to yield to the whip, mr. hoyer from maryland, three minutes. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding, unfortunately, this is a serious issue on which serious time has not been allotted because you put this on suspension. this is a serious issue. our country is in crisis from a fiscal standpoint. i wanted the gentleman to yield because i don't think he has any idea what the facts are. 89% increase in the debt under ronald reagan. he could have vetoed every one of those bills. under george bush, 115% increase in the debt. under bill clinton, less than 40%. ladies and gentlemen, this

issue is an important issue that is being treated not as an adult. this is not the adult moment of which speaker boehner spoke. and you didn't mention that the budget you voted for, i presume, i'm not sure, increased the debt by $1.9 trillion between now and october 1 of this year. ladies and gentlemen, this is not an honest debate. this is not an honest proposal. this is a serious issue. tarp is a serious issue and the american public didn't want to see it passed. and if not we would have gone in depression. who said that, george bush and benefit bernanke, the appointed head of the federal reserve. it was a tough vote. what do we do for america? we came together, republicans and democrats. more democrats supporting the president's request than his

own party, to save america from depression. we need to deal with this issue, ladies and gentlemen of america, seriously. not in 20-minute debates on each side. not as a simplistic suggestion that somehow president obama caused this. $1.3 trillion in wars we haven't paid for, a drug prescription bill we haven't paid for, tax cuts that your party voted for, not mine, that we didn't pay for. should we have tax cuts? that's fine. but we ought to pay for them, not have my great grandson who was just born a week ago pay for it. that's what you're doing. ladies and gentlemen, i'm going to vote no on this. we ought to vote for this. we ought to have a clean bill. and we ought to have both sides coming together and saying america needs this for debts that we have incurred. what i tell town meetings is like you go to macy's and take out your credit card and charge

$200 worth of goods and then you go home that night, your husband or your wife and you sit down and say look, we've got too much debt, we need to have a debt limit, put a $100 debt limit on us and then macy's sends you a bill and you send back a letter and say no, i have a debt limit, $100. so you send them a check for $100 and they send back a letter saying hey, no more credit, and guess what, we're suing you. this debt limit extension is for what we have already incurred. this debt limit extension vote is about whether or not we're going to pay our bills. but i will tell you this, we'll see who votes for paying our bills. mr. levin: i yield another 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for another 30 seconds. mr. hoyer: i want to see how many of your folks say yes, we need to pay our bills. america, we need to be a good debtor as well as a good creditor. we'll see how many of your folks vote. i've got just a sneaky

suspension -- suspicion it won't be very many if any. it's a good demagogue vote, ladies and gentlemen. and if we vote for it, guess what? you're for raising the debt limit without any fiscal discipline. well, when we were in charge, when the president of the united states wouldn't let you do some of the things you wanted to do, bill clinton was there to veto things, we had a surplus for four years in a row and we didn't increase the debt limit once. under george bush we increased it seven times. i yield back the balance of my time and urge a no vote on this irresponsible piece of legislation that should have been handled. >> real order, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves, the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. 114 members of the other party signed a letter to the leader who just spoke and asked for an unconditional increase in the debt limit. i know that's not maybe a fact

they want to acknowledge now, but it is so important that we have a clear path for it on given what the rating agencies are saying about our debt. they're saying it's not clear how we're going to deal with our indebtedness. it's so important that we set forward that when we address this issue, there is going to be the kind of spending reductions and structural reforms we need. that is going to have to be part of this discussion. we can't continue to have it clouded with this idea that we might have a debt limit increase without any of those. that's why it is so important to send this very strong signal today. i hope all of the members of your party join me in voting no on this bill. and at this time i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from michigan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the gentleman for yielding me this moment to

address the american people and the students who may be watching are in the gallery. once again you see the problem we have in washington. we cannot have a fact-based conversation with the american people which they desperately want. i talk to a lot of students back at home and i say, how many of you will have a summer job? a lot of them raise their hands and say, ok, we'll say you'll make $220 a week, they've got a problem. they take your credit card and say you're going to spend $370 a week. how long do you think you can do that as you're saving for college or that car or piece of computer equipment? can you do that all summer? the kid is looking at me says of course not, don't be dumb. you can't do that. then i say you know what, add 10 zeros to that and that's exactly what we're doing in the united states house of congress, what we've been doing repeatedly, both sides of the aisle with both administrations. it doesn't matter. we've got to get it under control. mr. huizenga: when you add those two zeros like my friend from new mexico was talking about, we take in $2.2 trillion

a year and spend $3.7 trillion a year. it's time to tear up that credit card, mr. speaker. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: how much time is there from our minimum 20 minutes? how much time do we have? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has 3 1/2 minutes. mr. levin: i yield to -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 4 1/2 minutes. mr. levin: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: at this time i yield two minutes to the distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from north dakota. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. >> mr. speaker, every time i talk to north dakotans, washington is on an

unsustainable path and it needs changed. out of control spending is unacceptable. mr. berg: our rising debt is unacceptable. and allowing this debt to grow without reform is unacceptable. this country borrows $4 billion a day. fixing this mess will require real reforms. it requires a serious, honest conversation about where this country stands today and how we want to leave this country for the next generation. it's irresponsible to leave our children with a nation that has a mountain of debt. it's unacceptable to increase our debt without making any attempt to reduce it. we cannot expect to do the same thing -- we cannot do the same thing over and over and expect different results. i've heard the north dakota

people. and i will not support any debt limit increase that does not contain significant cuts and budgetary reforms. it's time to stop the reckless spending. it's time to reduce the size of government. it's time to enact policies that will put america back on track. thank you and i yield the remainder of my time. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north dakota yields back the remainder of his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i yield a minute and a half to the gentleman from vermont, mr. walsh. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from vermont is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. wal -- one, we must pay our bills. whether those were incurred for

wars, whether it's for a prescription drug program that you were for or against, bail incurred. an obligation incurred is an obligation that must be paid. that is the fundamental responsibility that i acknowledge as the citizen that i acknowledge as an american, that i acknowledge as a congressman. this question of a long-term deficit reduction plan, we need it. you are right. we understand that. where is it? you have the opportunity in this legislation to present your plan that will get us on a glide path to fiscal balance. it's not here. suggesting either you don't have a plan or the plan you've wanted -- present does not have the support of the american people. we are playing russian roulette with a loaded gun in the american economy, and the deficit clock is ticking. this requires a substantial

response. the approach taken, a suspension vote trivializes our short-term obligation to pay our bills and a long-term obligation to have a long-term deficit reduction plan. this bill being sponsored by folks who were against what they propose and then making phone calls to wall street saying they were for is washington business as usual that people are tired of and not solving our problems. the default clock is ticking. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from vermont yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan, in levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i want to be sure of the time. we have two minutes, do we have? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has two minutes. mr. levin: and the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has three minutes.

mr. levin: i'd ask mr. camp, do you have other speakers? mr. camp: not at this time. mr. levin: i now yield one minute to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. andrews: mr. speaker, if the treasury had a dollar for every time someone says they want to cut the deficit we wouldn't have one. so let's stop talking about cutting the deficit and talk about how we can cut the deficit. let's let medicare negotiate the price of prescription drugs rather than pay whatever the drug companies demand and save $300 billion over 10 years. let's stop occupying iraq and afghanistan and paying their bills to the tune of $110 billion a year and bring the troops home. let's stop giving $80 billion in tax breaks to the oil companies that made record profits last year. let's require people making

over $1 million a year to pay just a little bit more to help reduce this problem. and let's have sensible reductions in other departments of government. this is not a time for us to provide cover to a political party. it's a time for us to cover the obligations to our seniors, not by abolishing medicare but by improving it, to cover obligations to our veterans and cover obligations to the country. we will come back in a couple weeks and do what we should be doing tonight which is to raise the debt ceiling and protect our country. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: mr. speaker, i have no further speakers. i will just reserve and close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. mr. levin: thank you, mr. camp. you are going to close. i now yield a final minute to our leader who will close on our behalf, ms. pelosi from the

great state of california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. pelosi: thank you for your compliment to our great state of california. thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, when i first heard that this legislation was coming to the floor i anticipated with some positive thought of, yes, this is the right thing to do. america must pay its bills. we know how to do that. we want to go forward assuring the american people that when we decide not to default on our debt that we are showing our strength even though it may be difficult for people to support that. then, i heard that it was going to come up like this on sunday. they said it would be up on tuesday. the bill is predicated on a false premise. it says the congress signs that the president's budget proposed, budget of the united states government, fiscal year

2012, necessitates an increase in the staffary debt of $2.4 trillion. -- staff wear debt of $.4 trillion. that's not the case. the bill never passed the house and never passed the united states senate. what passed was a republican budget which gives tax breaks to big oip, sending jobs overseas, weakens the middle class and does not create jobs and in fact increases the deficit by $1.9 trillion. $1.9 trillion increases the deficit. so what are we doing here today in what are we doing? the republicans have introduced a bill which have now resoundingly said they will oppose. where is the good faith effort here? we are, i believe, in good faith effort, house and senate, democrats and republicans, with vice president biden, to find ways to make sure we don't find ourselves in this situation

again. as a mother and grandmother i have absolutely no attention of passing any bills, personal or official, onto my children or grandchildren. and let me say the democrats know how to clean up the debt. we've had to do it before. the reagan-bush debt that president clinton inherited, it was a massive debt and because we took the vote for the economic plan and -- in 1993. we were on a path to fiscal soundness. the last four years of the clinton administration was in balance or in surplus. i believe the democratic whip, mr. hoyer, addressed these numbers earlier. i associate myself with his remarks and his passion on this subject. coming into the bush years, president clinton put us on a path of $5.6 trillion, a trajectory of $5.6 trillion in surplus. one of the biggest turnarounds in fiscal -- the fiscal situation in our country

happened under president bush. so all this talk about deficits and their immorality and the rest, i agree. but where was everybody when president bush was giving tax breaks to the wealthiest people in our country which did not create jobs, was giving away money to the pharmaceutical industry at the cost -- a tremendous cost to the deficit and not paying for the wars? again, we place our men and women in uniform in harm's way. they make us the home of the brave, the land of the free. we want them to have what they need. they want us to pay for it. we owe them an obligation to build a future worthy of their sacrifice, and that future does not contain unlimited growing debt. unlimited growing debt. never before in the history of our country have we lowered taxes for the rich while we were at war. this is an all-time first. so here we are. we inherit this debt of the

bush administration. that's why we're in the situation we're in. so as our colleagues try to characterize this as we're raising the debt limit so there can be more spending, no, we're not. we're avoiding default of the massive debt created during the bush administration. that's why we're here. so to predicate this legislation, which i really -- coming out of last week thought something i would support. i'm incumbered legislation so we will pay our bills and not be a death beat nation. instead, -- and not be a deadbeat nation. instead they predicate it on a false premise. the facts is these -- the republican budget did -- they just want to change the subject to medicare. they just want to change the subject to medicare. let's drop this the first day

from memorial day. the facts are these -- in their budget, they abolish medicare. not only that, they make prescription drugs more expensive for seniors. they eliminate prevention services for seniors which make them healthier and lower costs to us. they do all of this while also, where their children are concerned -- cutting education for their children, making college more expensive for nearly 10 million young adults. all of this, a travesty in terms of the hopes and aspirations of middle-class, low-income families in our country. and then to add insult to that injury, they come in here with a bill that they have to bring up immediately so they can oppose it. well, even the chamber of commerce said we're all in on

the joke. but it just isn't that funny if you're a struggling family in america who are struggling to keep your job, your home, try to send your child to college, have some confidence about your economic security. if you're a senior and you depend on medicare, to have it abolished hurts your economic as well as your health security. so this is about priorities. a budget should be a statement of our national values. what is important to us as a country, the education of our children, the respect of the dignified retirement for our seniors, job creation that we have a moral obligation to create jobs so we can have jobs for our workers and they can have their better future as well as make our country more competitive. reducing the deficit. we've done it once, the democrats did. we can do it again.

hopefully in a bipartisan way under the auspices that have been created for this purpose. we're right in the middle of it. we come in and say, ok, let's introduce a bill based on a false premise and then let's all oppose it. well, i'm glad you're opposing it because you're voting a false premise in this bill. but let's get serious. let's get serious about this. the american people are crying out for help. do you know that the tax cuts on which this deficit has grown, the tax cuts of the wealthy, did not create jobs? they increased the deficit. they did not create jobs. more jobs were created in the second year of the obama administration in the private sector than in the eight years of the bush administration. so this talk that tax cuts or the high end are going to create jobs, it just didn't happen. so we want to talk about the past. we want to know what we're going to do in the future, but it's important to learn from the past so we don't do it

again so we're not in this situation again. so as i said, the thought of an unincurvered, if that would be the -- unincumbered, if that would be the bill before us, this bill isn't right and i'm glad that hopefully will have a big, strong vote against it. i want to commend my colleague, congressman welsh. he was -- in his letter, he did not demand anything. he's saying, let's get together and talk about how we can have a clean debt limit bill. why don't we follow his lead on that and get together and see how we can do this in a way that's clean and/or at the same time has a plan, a bipartisan plan to reduce the deficit so that we can do just that as we increase jobs and strengthen the middle class?

that -- thank you, mr. welsh, for your leadership in that regard. i know it has been mischaracterized here, but i salute you for your leadership on that score. so, my colleagues, you vote the way you vote. but the fact is that what's happening on the floor is not serious. it's not serious. but the subject it addresses is serious. it's time for this congress of the united states to get serious about debt reduction, job creation and to stop this assault on medicare which is the basis for this legislation today. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from california, the minority leader, yields back her time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. camp: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all

members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on h.r. 1954. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. camp: mr. speaker, last february when the president submitted his budget for 2012 he did not provide any plan for reining in deficits and debt. and the administration called for a clean increase in the debt limit or an increase in the debt limit that had -- that was unconditional, that had no spending reductions or structural reforms to troy to address the problems we face. -- to atry to address the problems we face. and to increase the debt limit of about $2.4 trillion. 104 democrats have asked for an unconditional vote on the debt limit. and i would say that my colleagues on the other side have been very reminiscent about the bush years and i would just say that in four years the debt under the obama administration will exceed the

bush administration in eight years. another way of putting it, the debt under this president is going up at twice the rate as it did under president bush. . i would just say it's important we send a clear signal, that there will not be an unconditional increase in the debt limit and we're serious about dressing our debt limits in the country and we've seen the signals from the financial markets and heard what our constituents have said and it's very important we bring the kind of spending reductions and reforms that we need to this debate. i urge a no vote and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. both sides having yielded back their time. the question is will the house is spend the rules and pass h.r. 1954. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, two thirds not being in the affirmative the rule is not

suspended and the bill is not passed. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is is recognized. mr. camp: i demand the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote on the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, put proceedings on this question will be postponed. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the manager's amendment to h.r. 1484 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: a.h. 1484, a bill to amend title 38, united states code, to improve the appeals process of the department of veterans' affairs and to establish a commission to study

judicial review of the determination of veterans benefits. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from florida, mr. miller, and the gentleman from california, mr. filner, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from florida, mr. miller. mr. miller: mr. speaker, i yield myself as much time as i might consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. miller: i rise in strong support of the manager's amendment h.r. 1484 entitled veterans appeals improvement act of 2011. this legislation is a product of the committee's continued oversight of the disability claims process. we continue to look for ways to improve this laborious process and ensure that veterans receive their disability claims and the decisions in a timely and accurate fashion. now, under current law, veterans who disagree with their initial claims decision by v.a. can appeal to v.a.'s board of veterans appeals, but if a veteran submits additional

evidence before the board in support of their claims, it automatically goes back to the beginning, the very beginning of the process. the legislation before us would stop the shuffling of veterans back to the end of the line. it would direct that evidence submitted by a veteran in support of an appeal before the board of veterans appeals be considered by the board unless the veteran himself or herself elects to send it back to the very beginning of the process. this provision has garnered wide support from the veterans service organizations and the department of veterans' affairs. and i believe it will reduce the frustration that many of our veterans face when appealing a ratings decision and also reduce processing times. i want to thank the ranking member, mr. filner, for introducing this legislation and urge all members to approve the manager's aamendment and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves, the gentleman from

california, mr. filner, is recognized. mr. fillier: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. filner: i appreciate the chairman's cooperation for bringing the bill to the floor and it's the day after memorial day but it's important to honor veterans and i thank him and also urge that his manager's amendment, which took care of a funding issue be approved. so i am in strong support of this bill and i thank the members of the subcommittee on assistance and memorial affairs have worked very hard in moving this bill forward. it's been quite a long time coming to fruition and i know that many of our stakeholders look forward to its passage today. in the last congress, and this one, the committee on veterans' affairs held a multitude of language on the bill today and was developed as a result of vigorous oversight, hearings

and meetings conducted in the past two congresses. we received expert input from many of our stakeholders on the myriad, systemic and vexing issues surrounding the whole process of claims appeals. as such, section 2 of the bill would allow the veterans appeals to review evidence submitted directly to it by the veteran or survivor without issuing often unnecessary supplementals of the case to delay or to deny. i know many stakeholders are anxious to see this provision enacted including the v.a. itself. section 23 of the bill would have established a judicial review commission that would have been made up of 11 expert members to tackle appellate review issues facing our veterans and survivors. these issues included whether to continue the federal circuit court review of the decisions of the court of appeals of veterans claims, whether to

grant class-action and associational standing to the veterans' court and whether to require a decision on all issues raised on appeal, just to name a few. and the commission would have been required to report on its finding as recommended in congress and would not sunset until two years after that time. however, we are not able to move this section forward because of certain de minimus costs associated with operating the commission and i know we all have a bit of commission fatigue anyway, but at some point this is an unspned -- unexamined area of divergent subjects in need of expert attention and i hope we find a way to fund this in the future and look forward to working with mr. miller in a bipartisan manner to make this a reality and i ask all my colleagues to support the bill in its amended form and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves his time. the gentleman from florida is

recognized. mr. miller: i'm happy to yield as much time as he may consume the chairman on the committee on disability assistance and memorial affairs, mr. runyan of new jersey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for as much time as he wishes to consume. mr. runyan: thank you, mr. speaker, and thank you, chairman, for the time. i rise today in support of the manager's amendment to h.r. 1484, as amended, and the veterans appeals improvement act of 2011. the veterans disability claims policy is very complex and all of us at the veterans' affairs community are constantly seeking ways to improve the process for both our veterans and the v.a. this bill is a good first step in accomplishing the goal by improving upon the current process. specifically, section 2, which will work to simplify the process for submitting the evidence to the board of

veterans' appeals by allowing veterans to keep their place in line at the board of appeals for veterans' claims when they submit new evidence in support of their claim. under current law if a veteran submitted new evidence to their case, the intention of the -- of expediting their adjudication may have actually made the adjudication take longer due to the v.a.'s archaic rules and requiring the agency to resubmit the claim back to the regional offices. this bill corrects that problem. while i'm hopeful the v.a.'s new electronic processing system which is currently being developed will alleviate the backlog, we must do right by our veterans by continuing improving the claims process and continuing to make changes. no matter how small. to help our veterans who are currently stuck in a field paper based system. this bill is one of many steps my subcommittee will take on

this congress to address the backlog of certain veteran disability claims. on thursday, the subcommittee will be holding a hearing on underperforming regional offices and my staff is currently working on ways to improve training and accountability at v.a. regional offices. every veteran has the right to have their claim adjudicated in a prompt and accurate fashion. i am proud that many veteran service organizations as well as the v.a. has expressed support for h.r. 1484 as amended and urge all members to support h.r. 1484 as amended, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey yields back his time. the gentleman from florida, mr. miller, reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. filner, is recognized. mr. filner: thank you, mr. chairman. and i just want to point out to the chair of the subcommittee, and i guess the chair of the committee, also, we're taking

an important step today but it is a small step, and the chair, the gentleman from new jersey mentioned other small steps. we ain't going to clean up this backlog problem which approaches a million cases without major steps, a major blowing up of the whole way we do this stuff. we just hired 10,000 new people in the claims process -- i mean, the number of claims backlogged doubled. we're not getting any where with this brute force kind of thing. i have suggested many times to just cut out the red tape completely, at least in the short term, to clean up the backlog, to say to those who have submitted claims that are backed up both by the medical evidence and help from the veteran service officers of which we have thousands certified across the nation, that we ought to accept those claims and honor the service of our veterans. until we get to a mindset that

says blow up the bureaucracy in this thing, we're not going to solve the problem. so all these small steps will be taking forever. let's pass this small step today but let us take on a much bigger, bigger honoring of our veterans as we just talked about on memorial day by saying , you know, some of you have died while waiting for this process to continue. some of you have lost your homes because you didn't get a disability check. let's really honor our veterans this memorial day and say let's change the whole system that we have and stop trying to fool around with these small steps. i would reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from florida, mr. miller, is recognized. from miller: i have no further speakers, mr. speaker, and am prepared to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. filner: i have no further speakers and would urge adoption of the bill and yield

back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. miller: i associate myself with the remarks of my colleague, the ranking member of this issue of the disability claims backlog, has haunted this congress and this committee for many, many years, but nobody is more haunted by it than the veterans who have to go through that process. we together in a bipartisan way are looking for a way to try to solve this issue and it's obvious that money and bodies is not the way to do it, so together mr. filner and i and the members of our committees will work together and try to bring a reasonable solution to this congress that will help resolve the million veterans that are out there right now in backlog waiting for the disability claims. i ask unanimous consent that all members will have five legislative days for which to revise and extend their remarks and submit extraneous material on the manager's amendment of hrment r. 1407 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. miller: and i encourage all members to support the manager's amendment to h.r.

1484 as amended and yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. all time having expired. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1448 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those present having voted in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection -- the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. miller: i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are ordered. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8, rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. miller: i move to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 802 as

amened. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar 801, h.r. 802, a bill directing the secretary of veterans affairs to develop a program. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. miller and the gentleman, mr. filner, will each control 20 minutes. mr. mill every: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. miller: i rise in support of h.r. 80 to as amended a bill introduced by representative filner directing the department of veterans' affairs to develop a vet star awards program. it would recognize those businesses that hire veterans. unpliment among veterans is too high. 11% of veterans from the conflicts in iraq and afghanistan were unemployed in the month of april. i'm confident that you and all

the members would agree that we need to use every tool at our disposal to bring that number down. our nation's veterans begin a unique set of qualifications and skills to any job and while many in the private sector understand their value, more must be done. h.r. 802 is amended to recognize businesses who have done their part and hired veterans. this is a great way to recognize employers who have stepped up to the plate an helped our veterans. i want to thank ranking member filner for this bill and urge my colleagues to support h.r. 802 as amended and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserves. the gentleman from california, mr. filner is recognized. mr. filner: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. filner: i want to thank the chair of the v.a. committee for

the incredible cooperative effort we have devoted so far in this congress he mentioned in the last bill that we are united to try to find a way to cut through these intolerable and inexcusable delays in the disability claims process and we are working together as a top priority to make sure that those who have served this nation have a job when they get back because that, of course, leads to everything else good in our society. good job is what is needed. we are united in -- in saying to or veterans this is going to be our top priority. what we have done in h.r. 802 is a small step which will highlight efforts and create incentive for businesses have hire veterans by directing the v.a. to develop a low-cost annual award program to recognize businesses who contribute to veterans'

employment. the award to be displayed by business owners as a recognition of their commitment to the veteran community. i think the first lady and the second lady of this country are doing much to promote what our nation is doing for families of veterans. the white house might convene a summit of those who are both helping and will pledge to help hire veterans and highlight this issue more for all americans. this bill would authorize the v.a. to advertise the program in the national media and allow the public to be educated on those businesses that support the employment of veterans. again, i thank the chairman for scheduling the bill. it's part of our memorial day tribute to our veterans and i ask that our colleagues support the legislation and reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida reserve -- the gentleman reserves his time. the gentleman from florida, mr. miller.

mr. miller: i am happy to yield as much time as he mason sume to mr. stutzman of the great state of indiana. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he wishes to consume. mr. stutzman: i rise in strong support of h.r. 802 as amended this bill would require the department of veterans' affairs to establish an award program to reck nizz business which is excel in hiring veterans. we all know the unemployment problems face manage veterans. our youngest group of veterans have the highest unemployment rate among all the veterans while older veterans between the ages of 35 and 64 make up 2/3 of the unemployed veteran population. as we look for ways to increase veteran employment rates, it is absolutely appropriate that we honor those businesses which make the effort to hire veterans and to emphasize and to recognize their efforts. this award is not only -- this

award not only highlights employers who hire veteran bus it is my hope that it will also serve as an incentive for other employers to hire more veterans as well. at the subcommittee hearing on the bill, some witnesses suggested the program would be appropriately sponsored by the veterans employment and training service. while not required by the bill, i hope that the v.a. will consult with the department of labor during the selection process. i can tell you as a small business owner and one that highly values the service of our veterans to our country, i believe this is a wonderful measure to recognize those businesses who not only go out of their way but make it a priority to hire veterans to work at their businesses system of mr. speaker, highlighting businesses for their support of veterans seeking employment is the right thing to do and i urge my colleagues to support ranking member filner's bill and i appreciate him bringing

the bill forward and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana yields back his time. the gentleman from florida reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. filner: does the gentleman have further speakers? mr. miller: we have no further speakers. mr. filner: i again urge support of the bill and yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. miller: i thank the ranking member for bringing this bill to the floor. i would add that tomorrow morning the full committee will be having a hearing at 10:00 a.m. titled putting american veterans back to work. i would also ask my friend the ranking member not to give all the good ideas to the white house because you and i will be working together on a summit to bring together those individuals who are wanting good employees to hire and highlight the veterans' community to them for employment in their exens. -- companies. once again i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative day tots

revise and extend and add extraneous material to h.r. 802 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. miller: i encourage all members to support h.r. 802 as amended and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 802 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the -- the gentleman from florida. mr. miller: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and -- the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this resolution will be postponed.

for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri seek recognition? >> i move to suspend the rules and pass the bill s. 1082, to provide for seven rare extension of programs under the small business act and the small business investment act of 1958 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 1082, an act to provide for continuing programs under the small business act and small business investment act of 1958 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from missouri, mr. graves and the gentlewoman from new york, ms. velazquez each will control 30 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the -- the gentleman from missouri. mr. graves: i yield myself such time as i may consume.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. graves: the legislation before us is a series of programs that help our economy. the house voted to ex-tend the bill. unfortunately, that was used to pass the patriot act authorization, so we have this measure before us today. it extends the small business transfer program until the end of the year. it provides r&d dollars to small businesses to create jobs, spur innovative ideas to the market and solve problems all at no additional cost to the government. the bill extends for two months, until july 31, 2011, the authorization of several other programs in the small business administration. among them, the predisaster mitigation program that provides loans to small businesses to implement technology to reduce the impact of disasters on their operations.

with the recent devastation we've seen in the midwest, including in my home state of missouri and with hurricane season right around the corner, it's imperative that businesses bolster their emergency plans. this legislation is supported by both sides of the aisle as well as the leadership of both parties on the other side of the capitol. it's important not to let these programs lapse, they will expire if we do not pass this -- pass this legislation today. i urge my colleagues to vote yes of s. 1082 an i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri reserves. the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. velazquez: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. velazquez: thank you. the role of small businesses in moving the economy forward has never been more important. making up over 99% of all u.s. firms, they are critical to

innovation, wealth creation, and most importantly, employment gains. many look to the s.b.a. for assistance using its loan, contracting and training programs to start up or expand. unfortunately, the legislation before us, while seemingly uncontroversial, could make it harder for small businesses to access the very tools and resources. this bill is pass -- if passed will break with long standing house precedent and choose winners and losers among s.b.a. programs. by doing so, it will create confusion among small firms seeking to use the agency's initiatives. as many of you know, since september 30, 2006, the s.b.a. has been operating under a serious -- a series of 12 temporary extensions. while this ex--- while these extensions have varied in length, they have always treated all of the agency's

programs and initiatives equally. this has resulted in all of the s.b.a. programs operating um im-- unimpeded, ensuring that small businesses had ready act tose to -- access to tools and resources they need. unfortunately, s. 108 to 2 takes the unprecedented step of setting different authorization periods for certain s.b.a. programs, creating a maze of confusing dates and deadlines for small businesses. during a time when efforts are being made to reduce regulatory burden, congress should make certain that it is not adding to it by its own unnecessary action. given the extraordinary nature of s. 1082, it should not be considered a fast track on the suspension calendar, which is typically reserved for uncontroversial measures. instead, such a unique and

precedent-setting measure should go through regular order where members will have an opportunity to amend this highly unusual piece of legislation. at a minimum, this will enable members to have more time to understand the detrimental impact this legislation could have on small businesses. small businesses such as those represented by the u.s. women's chamber of commerce also oppose this legislation. voting against this extension will not affect any agency program in a meaningful way. small businesses will still be able to secure financing, receive contracts and access taining through the agency's initiatives. what a vote against this legislation will do, however, is ensure that we produce a more equitable piece of legislation that treats all

agencies' -- all the subject's initiatives fairly. if parties are serious about helping small businesses, they'll reject this measure and work expeditiously to improve a more -- to approve a more responsible extension. i urge my colleagues to vote no and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york reserves. the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. graves: i don't have any speakers, mr. speaker so i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. ms. velazquez feather sp the gentleman has no further speakers, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york yields back. the gentleman from missouri is recognized. mr. graves: i thank the ranking member. in closing, let me reiterate, this is a simple short-term extension of programs. we're not changing policy, just extending them until we work out the differences with the other body on the other side of the capitol. again, i urge my colleagues to vote aye and -- on s. 1082 and

keep these programs running so we can hopefully work out these differences. with that, i yield back the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from missouri yields back. all time having expired, the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass senate 1082? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative -- the gentlewoman from new york is recognized. ms. velazquez: i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is asking for the yeas and nays? ms. velazquez: that's correct. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in fare of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 10 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed. .

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and adopt concurrent resolution 16. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution. the clerk: concurrent resolution 15, concurrent resolution authorizing the use of the emancipation hall in the capitol visitor's center in an event to celebrate the birthday of king kamama. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california, mr. lungren, and the gentlewoman from hawaii, ms. hanabusa, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. lungren. mr. lungren: i ask unanimous consent all members have five legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks

. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentleman is recognized. mr. lungren: i ask unanimous consent to enter into the congressional record a letter waving further committee order on the house. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. lungren: i yield as much time as i wish to consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lungren: i'm pleased to support this resolution authorizing the use of emancipation hall june 5 to celebrate the birthday of king kamama of hawaii. the king often called kmama the great was a historian figure in hawaiian culture and rightfully so and fought for its independence at the beginning of the 18th and 19th century, his law or rule of the splintered paddle protecting noncombatants during wartime has been commended for its justice and established a human rights benchmark that would be build upon in the geneva conventions.

a statue of the king is in the hall collection and sits in the visitor's center visible to millions of our fellow citizens. on june 11 the people of hawaii will celebrate the 95th annual king kamama day in hawaii. adopting the resolution the members of the house will join our colleagues in the senate authorizing the use of the capitol visitor's center for a similar celebration in washington, d.c. i urge my colleagues to join me in support of this resolution and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california, mr. lungren, reserves the balance of his time. the gentlewoman from hawaii, ms. hanabusa, is recognized. ms. hanabusa: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. hanabusa: thank you, mr. speaker. concurrent resolution 16 is entitled authorizing the use of the emancipation hall in the capitol visitor's center for an event to celebrate the birthday of the king. it speaks to authorizing the use of june 5, 2011 and states

the separations of the ceremony may be carried out by such conditions as may be prescribed by the architect of the capitol and is not an unusual event and will be the 42nd time such a celebration has taken place within the capitol. this is hawaii's way to share its most unique history with all. june 11, the day of celebration , is the birthday of the king the great. he was born around 1758 and is credited with unifying the eight major islands by the year 1810. of course the islands of kuai and neuo claimed alluded them. this holiday was created in 1871 when hawaii was still a kingdom by the king's great grandson and was the first holiday proclaimed by the governor and legislature when hawaii became a state in 1959.

the celebration in his honor is about 140 years old this year. and what we identify with the celebration, the statue of the king and the traditional lei draping is over 100 years old itself. the american sculptor thomas r. gould was commissioned by the kingdom of hawaii to create the statue and did so in 1879 from his studio in rome. it was completed in 1880 but the ship that was transporting it from germany sank. it was in 1883 when the second statue made its way to hawaii. it stands 8 1/2 feet tall with the king in his royal garb. the helmet is depicted to reflect it is made out of very rare feathers, as is his cloak. the spear in his left hand is a symbol that his kingdom is willing to defend itself and

yet his right hand is extended in the gesture of aloha to welcome, that gesture which is synonymous with hawaii. the statue that stands here is the mold of the second statue this ch stand in front of the home of the hawaii supreme court. many actually would recognize it as the new headquarters of hawaii five-0. this was dedicated as a gift to the national sanctuary hall from hawaii in the year 1969. of note, the tradition of the lei draping dates back to 1901 when hawaii was a territory. i recall it as a child with firefighters draping the leis

on the statues using their long ladders and remember it clearly with the longest strands of the yellow plumeria blossoms being the flower of choice. these drapings take place on the big island as well and have for 42 years also taken place in the capitol. on june 10, 2010, president obama issued proclamation 8534 in honor of the bicentennial of the unification of hawaii. the president, who like me and others who were born in hawaii, and recognizes the significance of king kamehameha to our history. a relevant part of his statement is on this bicentennial, king kamehameha day, we celebrate the history and heritage of the aloha state which has immeasurably enriched our life and culture. the hawaii narrative is one of

profound pry ump and sadly deep in justice. it is a story of native hawaiians oppressed by crippling disease, and the eventual conquest of their sovereign kingdom. these grim milestones remind us of an unjust time in our history as well as the many pitfalls in our nation's long and difficult journey to perfect itself. yet through the peaks and valleys of our american story, hawaii's steadfast sense of community and mutual support shows the progress that results when we are united in spirit and limitless possibility. i'd like to also add as chair lungren pointed out, what king kamehameha is known for is creating the law of the land, the law as we call it, the law of the splintered paddle. in hawaii, we also call it -- [speaking hawaiian]

ms. hanabusa: this is an interesting story and one people may not believe, it really is the story of a warrior king and his humanity. it was a law to protect the civilians at the time of war. it is a lesson in human life. because the king, warrior king, decreed that any human life was precious and it was wrong for the powerful to mistreat the weaker. though many of us think of it as a celebration with parades and as we call it at home -- festivities and parties, it is more importantly a symbol of that which is hawaii. that which makes us so unique. i would like to express my appreciation on behalf of the people of hawaii of speaker boehner, chairman lungren, the architect of the capitol, the capitol police and all others who assist in this event. at this time, mr. speaker, i'd

like to inquire as to whether there's any other speakers. if there are no other speakers, then, mr. speaker, i yield back the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from hawaii yields back the remainder of her time. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr.00 glenn: it gives me great pleasure to join my colleague from hawaii to bring this resolution to the floor particularly because my daughter who was married in this town on sunday is on her way to hawaii to celebrate her honeymoon and i believe will actually still be there on june 5 so she will see that up close and personal. so i would urge all my colleagues to support this resolution. and with that, mr. speaker, i would yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back his time. all time having expired. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to senate concurrent resolution 16? those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those present having voted in the affirmative, the

rules are suspended the concurrent resolution is agreed to and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, proceedings will resume on motions to suspend the rules previously postponed. votes will be taken in the following order. h.r. 1484, by the yeas and nays. s. 1082 by the yeas and nays. h.r. 1954 by the yeas and nays. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute

vote, remaining electronic votes will be conducted as a five-minute vote. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from florida, mr. miller, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1484 as amended on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1484, a bill to amend title 38, united states code, to improve the appeals process of the department of veterans' affairs and to establish a commission to study judicial review of determination of veterans benefits. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended? members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the united

states. and maybe the gentleman on the other side might want to and during your time you'll have an opportunity to address that. >> i'd like to ask you a question. mr. scalise: we need to start installing fiscal discipline in this house and we're doing it now and it means no more blank

checked and no more unbridled spending. the president will have an opportunity to join us in that debate but frankly it starts tonight and we're saying we're not going to keep giving the credit limit. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman om michigan, mr. camp, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure to yield to the whip, mr. hoyer from maryland, three minutes. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding, unfortunately, this is a seris issue on which serious time has not been allotted because you put this on suspension. this is a serious issue. our country is in crisis from a fiscal standpoint. i wanted the gentleman to yield because i don't think he has any idea what the facts are. 89% increase in the debt under ronald reagan. he could have vetoed every one of those bills. under george bush, 115%

increase in the debt. under bill clinton, less than 40%. ladies and gentlemen, this issue is an important issue that is being treated not as an adult. this is not the adult moment of which speaker boehner spoke. and you didn't mention that the budget you voted for, i presume, i'm not sure, increased the debt by $1.9 trillion between now and october 1 of this year. ladies and gentlemen, this is not an honest debate. this is not an honest proposal. this is a serious issue. tarp is a serious issue and the american public didn't want to see it passed. d if not we would have gone in depression. who said that, george bush and benefit bernanke, the appointed head of the federal reserve. it was a tough vote.

what do we do for america? we came together, republicans and democrats. more democrats supporting the president's request an h own party, to save america from depression. we need to deal with this issue, ladies and gentlemen of america, seriously not in 20-minute debates on each side. not as a simplistic suggestion that somehow president obama caused this. $1.3 trillion in wars we haven't paid for, a drug prescription bill we haven't paid for, tax cuts that your party voted for, not mine, that we didn't pay for. should we have tax cuts? that's fine. but we ought to pay for them, not have my great grandson who was just born a week ago pay for it. that's what you're doing. ladies and gentlemen, i'm going to vote no on this. we ought to vote for this. we ought to have a clean bill. and we ought to have both sides coming together and saying america needs this for debts

that we have incurred. what i tell town meetings is like you go to macy's and take out your credit card and charge $200 worth of goods and then you go home that night, your husband or your wife and you sit down and say look, we've got too much debt, we need to have a debt limit, put a $100 debt limit on us and then macy's sends you a bill and you send back a letter and say no, i have a debt limit, $100. so you send them a check for $100 and they send back a letter saying hey, no more credit, and guess what, we're suing you. this debt limit extension is for what we have already incurred. this debt limit extension vote is about whether or not we're going to pay our bills. but i will tell you this, we'll see who votes for paying our bills. mr. levin: i yield another 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for another 30 seconds. mr. hoyer: i want to see how many of your folks say yes, we need to pay our bills.

america, we need to be a good debtor as well as a good creditor. we'll see how many of your folks vote. i've got just aneaky suspension -- suspion it won't be very many if any. it's a good demagogue vote, ladies and gentlemen. and if we vote for it, guess what? you're for raising the debt limit without any fiscal discipline. well, when we were in charge, when the president of the united states wouldn't let you do some of the things you wanted to do, bill clinton was there to veto things, we had a surplus for four years in a row and we didn't increase the debt limit once. under george bush we increased it seven times. i yield back the balance of my time and urge a no vote on this irresponsible piece of legislation that should have been handled. >> real order, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves, the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you, mr.

speaker. 114 members of the other party signed a letter to t leader who just spoke and asked for an unconditional increase in the debt limit. i know that's not maybe a fact they wanto acknowledge now, but it is so important that we have a clear path for it on given what the rating agencies are saying about our debt. they're saying it's not clear how we're going to deal with our indebtedness. it's so important that we set forward that when we address this issue, there is going to be the kind of spending reductions and structural reforms we need. that is going to have to be part of this discussion. we can't continue to have it clouded with this idea that we might have a debt limit increase without any of those. that's why it is so important to send this very strong signal today. i hope all of the members of your party join me in voting no on this bill. and at this time i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from michigan. the eaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute.

>> thank you, mr. speaker. ippreciate the gentleman for yielding me this the nays are one, 2/3 of those present having voted in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. without objection the title is amended. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from missouri, mr. graves, to suspend the rules and pass h. 1082 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: senate 1082, an act to provide for an additional temporary extension of programs under the small business act and the small business investment act of 1958 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill? members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of

representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 387, the nays are 33. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the

bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1954, on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1954, a bill to implement the president's request to increase the statutory limit on the public debt. the speaker pro tempore: the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vet, the yeas are 97, the nays are 318, seven recorded as present. 2/3 not being in the affirmative, the rules are not suspended and the bill is not passed.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the house will be in order. the house will be in order. members please take your conversations off the floor. please clear the well. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the chair will postpone

further proceedings today on the motion to suspend the rules on which a recorded vote or the yeas and nays are ordered or on which the vote incurs objection under clause 6 of rule 20. any record vote on the postponed question will be taken later. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to prules and pass the bill h.r. 1194. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1194, a bill to renew the authority of the secretary of health and human services to approve demonstration projects designed to test innovative strategies in state child welfare programs. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from kentucky and the gentleman from washington each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from kentucky. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of the bill under consideration.

the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the house will be in order. members, please take your conversations off the floor. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise tonight in support of h.r. 1194, a bill to extend child welfare waiver authority. this bill will allow states to test innovative approaches to improve the way we protect children from abuse and neglect in doing so it extends authority that was in place between 1994 and 2006 that has since lapsed. since 2006, the department of health and human services has not had the authority to approve new efforts by states to test better ways of helping children at the risk of abuse or neglect. the bill before us today would simply allow h.h.s. to approve new waivers once again so states can test new ways of betting serving children and families --

better serving children and families. mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. the house will be in order. the house will be in order. the gentleman may proceed. mr. davis: thank you, mr. speaker. the current chairman of the ways and means committee which has jurisdiction over child welfare programs i'm pleased to co-sponsor this legislation with my friend, mr. mcdermott, a current member of the subcommittee as well as its prior chairman. the human resources subcommittee held a hearing on child welfare waivers last year which showed the value of states' flexibility in this area. since 1994, 23 states have run waiver programs that helped inform the child welfare policy debate and more importantly improve the lives of children and families. seven states have been granted extensions and have continued their waiver programs approved before 2006. this bipartisan bill before us today will allow such current waiver programs to continue while importantly providing the secretary of h.h.s. with authority to approve up to 10

new waivers a year. the bill before us is identical to legislation the house approved unanimously on september 23, 2010. however the senate did not act on that legislation before conclusion of the last congress. this bill is supported by the national conference of state legislatures as well as groups active in promoting effective child welfare programs. i ask unanimous consent to insert into record following my remarks copies of their letters in support of h.r. 1194. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. davis: especially in challenging financial times, we must be sure that taxpayer dollars are well spent. the original 1994 required rigorous evaluations of each waiver program and this bill continues that requirement. this means states will have the flexibility to test new ideas but the american people and the congress will know if these ideas have made a difference. and because these waiver programs must be cost-neutral to be approved in the first place, the congressional budget office has assured us that this legislation as a whole is cost-neutral.

i ask unanimous consent to include the c.b.o. analysis in the record as well. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. davis: it's fitting that we're debating this measure in may which is national foster care month. national foster care month is a time to celebrate the great work done by thousands of foster parents across the nation and also time to raise awareness of the hundreds of thousands of children in foster care who need a permanent home. this legislation will let states test better ways of helping these young people including by working with families to keep kids from entering foster care in the first place. as we recognize national foster care month, this bill is great way to work toward solutions that ensure each child has a permanent home. child welfare legislation has often been an area of bipartisanship in this chamber and i'm grateful that we can continue that tradition with the bill before us today. i thank mr. mcdermott for his extensive work on this bill and look forward to continuing work with him and all our colleagues as this legislation moves forward. i urge support for this legislation and reserve the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from washington. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of h.r. 1194, a bill that would reinstate authority within the department of health and human services to allow up to 10 states and native american tribes a year to conduct demonstration projects that test ways to improve child welfare programs. i want to thank the chairman of the human resources committee, mr. davis, for following in the tradition of the previous chairman, mr. linder. he was the one who worked with us last year in putting this through and it's good to have that same thing going through. this is a rare bill, it's hallucinately -- actually a bipartisan bill. this bill reinstates the waiver authority to allow the states and tribes to implement and evaluate innovations, to improve outcomes for at-risk families and children. the legislation is cost-neutral and renews waiver authority over the next six years.

23 states and jurisdictions received waivers under the previous authority which began in 1997 and ended in 2006. although the authority for new waivers has expired, a handful of states and counties have continued demonstration projects including florida, ohio and los angeles county, california. the legislation also includes a new emphasis on the federal side of supporting waivers that identify and address domestic violence and related problems which lead to children being placed in foster care. it emphasizes early intervention and crisis intervention services that safely reduce out of home placements. the waiver authority requires states to report on the federal, state, local and private funding sources that support various services under the demonstration project. this additional information will increase our understanding of waiver policies and increase

accountability. the innovative strategies successfully tested in states under the previous waiver authority taught us some lessons at the national level that were helpful because it made child welfare policy more effective. one of the most successful demonstration projects provided support to grandparents and other relative caregivers who became the guardians of young relatives in foster care. this became federal policy when it was incorporated into the foster and connections act which passed in 2008. since the waiver authority expired, states, service providers and foster care experts have called for it to be renewed, to allow continued innovation and evaluation of strategies to address the complex needs of children and families in our 21st century

communities. many states like my state of washington can do more with limited funds than they have if they have well-defined waivers. following the hearing last year in the ways and means committee, i introduced legislation with john linder, as i mentioned before, to reinstate the waiver authority. we did it late in the session and a short time later the legislation passed the house. unfortunately it was late in the session, as i said, and the senate was unable to take up the bill. so we thought if we put it over early this time, maybe it will be dealt with before the end of the 111th. the 112th, excuse me. the legislation before us is identical to the bill passed in this house unanimously. mr. speaker, my support for restoring this waiver authority is not meant to suggest that traditional federal investments are not needed in the child welfare system. we need to fully fund our child welfare programs. these child welfare waivers simply give the states more flexibility in developing

innovations. waivers are not a panacea. they are not a substitute for comprehensive solutions for the problems that remain in the child welfare system. i also want to point out that the authority provided by this bill in no way affects the child's entitlement for assistance under federal foster care and adoption assistance programs. this is important to remember for anyone comparing the waiver authority in this bill to proposals for other safety net programs. reinstating the child welfare waiver authority will allow states to continue developing strategies to improve the lives of children and families who are some of the most vulnerable in our midst. i urge a yes on this legislation and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. davis: mr. speaker, i'm going to continue to reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance

of his time. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, i yield now three minutes to the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for three minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the distinguished gentleman and i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. jackson lee: let me thank dr. measure -- mcdermott, first of all, for his consistent years-long support of our children that are in foster care and i thank the manager and the representative of the majority for their hard work. this bill was introduced in the 111th congress, it was passed by voice vote. it is an important amendment to the social security act, to renew through f.y. 2016 where it authorizes up to 10 states and tribes to conduct demonstration projects that serve as tests for methods to improve child welfare programs. as a co-chair of the congressional children's caucus, we have worked on a number of issues through the years.

we've been privileged to deal with the questions of mentoring, the question of bullying, the question of dealing with the disabled child and, yes, the question of dealing with foster parenting. in fact, some years ago i served as the co-chair with then congressman mike andrews to provide relief to foster parents by finding a process that would provide vacation time for them. i have gone to meetings dealing with grandparents who have become foster parents. and so it is important to be able to find the best practices. the waivers that will come about are designed to afford more flexibility to states in determining how to use federal funding for child welfare and foster care. the program gave more discretion to the state department that administered child welfare programs aimed to foster innovative and effective child welfare programs. one of the issues in the state

of texas is the age-old issue of aging out. what do you do with the 18 or 19-year-old who had lived in foster care, ages out and has no place to go? i hope in the course of this legislation we'll find that creative thinking. this bill of course addresses delays to guardianship for children in foster care, provides early and crisis intervention programs that are so important to improve the outcomes of the foster care system and addresses domestic violence that results in placement in foster care. to the late congressman, i am reminded that we had a facility called the mickey leland refuge or relief area in our district, the 18th congressional district, that provided an emergency placement for children that had to be taken out of a home immediately. we cradled children from zero to toddler age. our children need us. and those who are in fact taking

care of foster children need us as well. there are 423,000 children living in foster care, 26,000 of these children were from my home state of texas. i frankly believe those numbers are even higher. but this legislation will continue a unique opportunity for states, grand labors to address the diverse needs of the cities and religions for the particular states. i can't think of a more precious resource than our children. i am very glad to be part of the congressional children's caucus and i deeply believe this particular legislation, mr. speaker, provides a safety net for our children. i ask my colleagues to support it and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from kentucky -- the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. davis: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington. mr. mcdermott: i want to say thank you again to my colleague from kentucky. this working relationship on behalf of children is one that has never gotten really political. and it is one of the nicest things about serving in

congress. so i appreciate having jeff come on and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. davis: i'm grateful again to acknowledge my colleague, mr. mcdermott, in and his many years of work on this issue. the staff in both the majority and minority on the subcommittee have worked very hard through time on this issue to bring this bipartisan measure to the floor today. passage of h.r. 1194 will renew child welfare waiver authority so states can again test new ways of helping at-risk youth. these waivers let states spend money on what we know is most effective which is working to keep children safely together with their families. with that i urge passage of this bill and yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 1194. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded

in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. the chair is prepared to entertain one-minute requests. for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? >> i request unanimous -- i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. on thanksgiving day, 1944, current mountain home resident augi hembings hill took a bullet in the shoulder. that was how he received his first purple heart. he was back to battle a mere three weeks later. on december 19, three weeks -- december 19, he earned his

second purple heart. his company tried to take shelt for the barn but were attacked. mr. draw spord: two months later he was caught in mortar fire. a mortar hit so close to him it knocked him unconscious and a piece of shrapnel was embedded in his cheek that shrapnel stayed with him until he went stateside. that's how he earned his third purple heart. he's one of many in my district who selflessly fought for america. our district has an amazing group of veterans from world war i to the current war on terror who put america first and their own lives second. these are the people that make this country great. yesterday was memorial day a day to honor those who fought for our country and remember the fallen soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice. my family and i spent this weekend honoring all who served, not only in the first district of arkansas but across america. i want to thank our troops and

families for the shared sacrifice they make to our country and a special thank you to sergeant augie hill who is a living reminder of why i'm so proud to to be an american. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> i rise to honor the memory of pinky mcnamara, he passed away last week at the age of 78. he attended the university of minnesota on athletic scholarship, earning three varsity letters as halfback for the golden gophers. shortly after his graduation, he embarked on a successful year in -- career in business, buying struggling companies an turning them around. over the years, he would donate millions of dollars to his alma

mater's liberal arts and athletic departments. along with his brother bob, pinky helped raise funds to bring football back to the university's campus that he loved. his philanthropic efforts will leave a lasting and permanent mark on campus with the mcnamara alumni center he may be gone but his legacy will always live on at the campus he loved. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. wilson: i return from a meeting with the nato parliamentary assembly, chaired by mike turner accompanied by mike ross and others. we were welcomed by the current mayor who is a champion of freedom and democracy in a nation which has the involved

from the -- evolved from the chains of communist totalitarian to being a vibrant democracy today. we were briefed on issues critical to promoting democracy in the world. andre rasmussen presented a clear report of their progress in iraq and afghanistan while encouraging civil society movements in africa. bulgaria is a valued partner of america. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from tennessee rise? >> request unanimous consent to address the house. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

mrs. black: i've been doing town hall meeting, i've had about 12. people keep telling me, hands off my medicare. i tell them, there's a dirty little secret the democrats in congress and the president don't want them to know, that is their medicare is already changed. because last congress, when this house passed obamacare, they robbed $500 billion from medicare to pay for the government takeover of health care. not only that, but obamacare set up an independent payment advisory board, 15 unelected bureaucrats will ration your medicare. to cut the cost and limit seniors' access to medicare. and you know what else happens under this plan in the decade -- in a decade, there is no more medicare because the program will become bankrupt. the truth about the republican plan and the path to prosperity. under our plan, we save medicare. we address the unsustainable growth rate of medicare so the program doesn't go bankrupt in

10 years. the democrats have no plan to stop medicare's descent into bankruptcy but the republicans do. unlike obamacare where you have no choice, the republican plan gives you a choice. now the dirty little secret is out there. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from louisiana rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the c.m.s. actuary just came out with the grim news. apparently the insolvency date of medicare was moved up to 2024. that's only 1 years from now and it will probably move up again before we get there. mr. fleming: this is after half a billion dollars has been shaved from medicare to extend the life of medicare and that

money is already infamously booked twice, once for middle class insurance subsidies and the other to extend the life of medicare. the 2012 budget that passed the house with support is the beginning to the solution for this -- of this problem. it preserves medicare for those 55 and other re-- and reforms it to a market based system with lots of choices for those under 55 today. democrats simply play mediscare on this issue and insist on doing nothing. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: are there further one-minute requests? the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leave of absence requested for mr. duncan of south carolina for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the request is granted. for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas rise?

without objection. ms. jackson lee: a lot of times our constituents are confused about the processes of this house. the one thing we're not confused about is what we all join together in unity, our patriotism and our respect and affection and admiration for the united states military. yesterday, many of us interfaced with families, gulf star -- gold star mothers or blue star mothers, families who lost a loved one in battle. it was a serious time. i commemorated and celebrated with my fellow houstonians in texas. even those who came up to me

and said, veterans can't get jobs. for me to come today and be part of a mockery of a vote on the debt ceiling when everyone knew it was a joke. it wasn't a joke for me. our responsibility is to make sure america pays her bills, not to leave soldiers on the battlefield with no equipment, no shelter no food, and certainly not to take away veteran's benefits, medicare, and medicaid. let us be responsible and stand for the american people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. are there further one-minute requests? under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentleman from tennessee, mr. roe, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. roe: i thank the speaker and we're going to spend the

next hour, tonight, discussing basically the health care debate and what's been -- what has occurred in the past two years here in congress. and we've asked our physician colleagues and health caucus to come down and spend this hour discussing this issue. now i think before we start, what we need to do is talk about why we're having this debate. and the health care debate obviously, we need health care reform in america and one of the frustrations at least i've had since i was here is during our last congress, we had nine physicians in the physicians' caucus, m.d.'s, and 13 people total in that caucus and none of us were consulted about the health care bill. when i came to congress, i asked myself the question, just as i was seeing a patient, what's wrong with the american health care system? and the problem with the american health care system is,

today still and getting worse, is it costs too much money to go to the doctor and go to the hospital. when i would see patients in my office, i could see the cost ever-rising. back in the 1980's, we tried plans called managed care, capitation, in our state we tried to reform our medicaid program, all failed to hold the costs down. the second problem i saw with the american health care system is this, is that there are a group of our citizens who didn't have access to affordable health insurance coverage. if it was affordable, we'd all have it. the example i use, let's say a sheetrock workers or -- worker or carpenter that puts up studs in a house or home builder that may not have a business big enough to afford health care coverage, maybe this person's wife worked at a local diner. together, in our area, you can get along just fine, make $40,000 a year, they couldn't afford $12,000 premiums.

the third problem i saw is a liability issue. we see ever escalating health care costs, i see dr. gingrey is with us, fellow ob/gyn, and from the time of my practice, $4,000 in 1977, malpractice insurance at that time, to $70,000 today. who bears those costs? our patients. we dwan this debate, which i think was a false premise, basically the health care bill was to cover those people who didn't have insurance and this particular bill, the affordable health care act, so-called obama care, did do a couple of things. it has done nothing, it's beginning to be initiated as far as lowering the health care costs. it has done nothing. if you look at every business around, those rates are skyrocketing and making it less affordable for us. number two, it did increase access and how did it increase

access? at least it appears so far it increased access by massively expanding medicaid and the one thing i do like, it allows young people to stay on their parents' coverage until they're 26. in a subcommittee hearing we had the other day, i asked h.h.s. director sebelius, how many people would this bill cover this 2,500 page bill, she estimated 20 million or 30 million more americans. the congressional budget office estimates it will add 15 million more people to medicaid a system that's already bankrupting the states. the c.m.s. actuary believes it will be 24 million more people on medicare. you add six million young people to that and without this incredibly complicated bill in two paragraphs, you could have done exactly what they did in this bill without the complicated issue we're going

to talk about later tonight system of we did nothing to lower costs, we did increase access by increasing medicaid and potentially exchanges and we can talk about that later and lastly liability, which there's nothing in the affordable care act for that. the other thing that's glaringly not in this bill which is incredibly important is the so-called doc fix system of our viewers understand what that is, as a physician, when i see medicare patients, the federal government pays a certain amount with medicare part b and the person getting the care pays for those premiums also. in 1997, to help hold health care costs down, there was a formula put in so that if costs went above a certain amount the doctors were -- the providers were cut. right now, if we hadn't passed a temporary fix of this, the doctors would have had a 26% increase and in -- decrease, i mean, and in two years that's going to be a 30% decrease in

payments. what difference does that make if you're out there and you're a medicare age patient as i became last summer. i can speak for some experience. i signed up for medicare last july. the problem is the cost the physician opening and practicing in their office. when you don't pay the cost of the care and we're seeing it where very fine physicians are no longer accepting medicare patients, we believe this could get much, much worse under the affordable care act and as the two past speakers brought out, what this bill also did and what we're going to discuss tonight in more detail, is not just the entire health care bill but it's going to be medicare, one specific part of it, the independent payment advisory board but to get to that we have to explain the problem and why we're having this discussion. and one of the charts i want to show you here, this is why we're

having the discussion right here. is because right now we're looking at a budget. if we do nothing at all and i use president obama as an example, president obama just turned 50 years of age. in 2025 he'll be medicare age and guess what? four things will make up the entire budget of this country. medicaid, medicare, social security and interest on the national debt. and that could come even sooner, depending on certain economic factors. so the reason we're having this and i had a person come up to me this weekend at a memorial day event and said, dr. roe, i'm concerned that my children and grandchildren will not have medicare and said, that is exactly the reason we're having this discussion, as i have that same concern. we want to save this program for future generations. and he said, well, why don't we just cut foreign aid and i said, that's fine, and last year we cut earmarks. it that makes up only 2% of our

budget. if we completely did away with all foreign aid, which some people i think would agree we need to do, but if we did that it would only cover -- it would take 15 years of no foreign aid to take care of medicare for one year at today's dollar expenditures. and let me get just a little bit of history on the medicare program which has been very successful and very popular in this country. 1965 it came out, it was a $3 billion program and the reason it was was because we had seniors that didn't have a way to put money back and to take care of their health care after they had retired from their work. so this program was started. medicare part a which is the hospitalization part and medicare part d which is the physician part. it was a $3 billion program at that point. the government estimators said in 25 years, in 1990, this will be a $15 billion program. the real number was over $100 billion. and today's -- and today, just 20 short years later, it's over

$500 billion. this is a totally unsustainable growth rate that we have to deal with. now, in passing oz our two previous speakers mentioned, we've cut this bill, cut $500 billion out of medicare. one little thing that was left out of those talks, though. this year, beginning in january, in 2011, our baby boomers hit retirement age, age 65, medicare age. at three million per year, approximately 10,000 a day. and guess what? in 10 years we're going to have $500 billion less to spend on medicare and 35 million more people to take care of and so you do the math. how are we going to control this? how are we going to control these costs? well, the president suggests a plan called the ipath. right now in medicare we have med pack and the medicare advisory board which gives advice to this body right here, the congress, about how we're going to spend our medicare dollars and suggestions and the

congress has the right to make those decisions. well, this medicare board, this ipath board that's going to be in effect in 2014, it starts this year with some funding, 2014, 15 bureaucratically appointed people will make decisions based on nothing but cost. let's say we spend $500 billion on medicare and the actual cost of providing the care to our citizens is $550 billion. we've lost our ability in this body right here to say how those dollars are spent. that board will make a decision to cut the spending to $500 billion based on nothing but cost. not quality and not access. and i can assure you, if you have 35 million more people, or 36 million more people chasing $500 billion less, three things happen, one is access to your doctor go down, costs will go up and essentially you will have

this board rationing care. i have several of my colleagues, i'm going to stop, there are many more things we can talk about, we have the next hour. i want to recognize my colleague, dr. hayworth from new york, for some comments. ms. hayworth: would the gentleman yield? mr. roe: yes, i will yield. mr. hayworth: thank you. i send to the desk a privileged report for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 287, resolution providing for consideration of the bill, h.r. 2017, making appropriations for the department of homeland security for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2012, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. >> i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee voiced. mr. roe: i thank the gentleman. dr. hayworth. ms. hayworth: i thank our distinguished colleague from tennessee, dr. roe. dr. roe, in new york's district 19 i've been sharing a headline with our seniors and with all of

our citizens, which is that the affordable care act ends medicare as we know it. it ends medicare as our seniors know it and you, sir, have stated the reason exactly. the independent payment advisory board, which was written into law, passed by the 111th congress, signed into law by president obama, the independent payment advisory board will assure that our seniors, starting in 2015, when they have to make a .5% cut in medicare's budget, our seniors will stop having the access to care that they are accustomed to and they will not be happy about it. and then in every successive year, in 2016 it will be 1%, 2017, 1.25%, 2018, 1.5%, if i've done that math right, dr. roe. our seniors will find that their access to the doctors they know, the doctors they prefer, will not be the same.

so when we talk about what we need to do as a nation, we in the house majority have pledged to our seniors that we will keep the promises that america has made to them, to make sure that medicare benefits remain secure and safe for as long as they need them, which is why in the budget that we passed in april, the path to prosperity budget, we guaranteed that seniors 65 and above and in fact our citizens aged 55 and above will not see changes to medicare as they know it. that gives americans 10 years at least to prepare for a more secure future for medicare, for exactly the reason that you've talked about, dr. roe, which is that we do have -- we have many blessings in this extraordinary country and one of them is that we do continue to make wonderful advances in medical science.

and they do come at a certain cost. so we have a challenge that we need to face together. there are certainly ways in which we can together as a nation figure out how we make our health care more cost effective and there are lots of opportunities. it's true there's waste, fraud and abuse in the system, that needs to be addressed. there are also ways that he can can protect our health -- that we can protect our health belter in our youth that americans haven't had to think about nearly as much in the past couple of decades but that they are starting to think about. so we need to make sure that we're making those advances together. and that our seniors and all americans who need advanced care will be able to get it, that the sickest among us will not be deprive ed of of care because of the arbitrary decisions of a board that has to cut budgets. again, that's the headline. the affordable care act ends medicare as you know it, but the

budget that the house republican majority passed in april does is to restore medicare as our seniors know it and allow all americans time to prepare for a better future for medicare. thank you so much, dr. roe. mr. roe: i thank the doctor for being here. just for the viewers today, i want to thank all of my colleagues for being here and all of you all are health professionals, not career politicians. i want to point out that dr. hayworth has just joined us in the congress, i'm a one-term congressman, i practice medicine for 31 years, i know you did for a long time, we have ob-gyn doctors, family practice, cardiovascular surgeons, nurses in the well tonight. these are not long-term politicians, these are practicing health care providers who have been out there. i think the question i always ask myself when i look at legislation, having just left the examining room, is how is

this legislation affect the care think a can give my patient? i think that's the one that we all worry about. we worried about it with insurance companies, all of us have followed insurance companies about providing care. and i believe that at some point in time we all do this, that care is going to be rationed. the question is, who is going to do it? is it going to be a federal bureaucrat and a federal nameless, faceless panel here in washington, d.c., or is that decision going to be made between a patient, a doctor and their family? and i believe that's who should be making health care decisions in america. it should be made in the examining room and the doctor's office with consultation, not by some nameless bureaucrat up here in washington, d.c. i thank you for being here, dr. hayworth, and i now yield to dr. gingrey, my good friend from georgia, fellow ob-gyn. mr. gingrey: mr. speaker, i thank the gentleman for yielding and i thank him for leading this hour on such an important discussion and of course i thank all of my colleagues on the floor here tonight, i think they

understand that dr. roe has authored the repeal legislation of ipad, this independent payment advisory board, created under obamacare. dr. roe, mr. speaker, just said that the doctor-patient relationship, the provider-patient relationship, be that provider an advanced practice nurse or psychologist or physician or even the hospitals of course are huge providers of health care, and who should be -- we be concerned with as members of congress? well, it's those 700,000 people that each of us represent all across this country and that doctor-patient, provider-patient relationship that is most important. cost of course is important, but first and foremost is the sanctity of that care. and that's exactly what dr. roe is speaking of, mr. speaker, and why it's so important that we do

vote to pass his bill and we do it as quickly as possible to repeal this very bad decision. in fact, mr. speaker, back i think in december of 2009, almost two years ago, our colleague on the other side of the aisle, a senior member of the appropriations committee, the gentleman from massachusetts , richard neal, authored a letter that many of us in a bipartisan way co-signed. i think over 100 signatures to that legislator, literally begging the president and the administration to forget this idea of creating this exact same board that dr. roe is talking about and my colleagues will be talking about tonight. it was called something different then, in the construction phase of obamacare. but whatever you call it, today of course we understand it is ipab, independent patient

advisory board, i call it ibad, independent bureaucratic absolute dictators. these unelected 15 people that can literally and will as the gentlewoman from new york just said, dr. hayworth, that they will have the ability come 2014 to start making these cuts and to make them where the biggest growth area and cost is. well, mr. speaker, we all know, they say that there will be no rationing. well, you can say it's not rationing but if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck and looks like a duck, it's a dufpblgt and it is rationing. and what will happen -- duck. and it is rationing. and what will happen, we know it, we health care providers have spent, what, 500 years of clinical experience in the aggregate, we know exactly what these bureaucrats will do. they'll say that if someone is

above a certain age, you know, let's pick one, say if you're 65 years old and you come down with leukemia and lymphoma and what you desperately need when that chemotherapy has failed to keep you in remission is a bone marrow transplant, but because that's so expensive, the decision will be made that, no, nobody over a certain age, nobody over a certain age will be eligible for a transplant. of a kidney. of a lung. of a liver. of a heart, indeed. and this is something that is absolutely unacceptable to us. it's unconscionable. so, mr. president, and say this through you, mr. speaker, please listen to us, listen to us. we've got another letter coming, it's going to be signed by all 21 of the members of the house g.o.p. doctors caucus. i wish we had some democratic members as a part of this group but hope sprin e