the chair: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from hawaii rise? ms. hanabusa: i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment offered by mrs. hanabusa. insert after the dollar amount the following, increase by $50 million. page 80, line 1, insert the following, reduced by $50 million. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. hanabusa: this amendment is intended to have funds to restore the foffers legacy program to the fiscal year 2011 level as well as 2008 level. this amount is $83 million less than what was requested by the administration and $22 million than was authorize in 2010. the reason is we can't let this

program be eliminated by the present funding of only $3 million in the present bill before us. the program partners with the states to protect environmentally sensitive program. it is a partnership program which states are permitted to accomplish this very important goal. it is a vom unitary program that encourages the private owned land and easements without removing the land from private ownership. the easements protect air quality from threatened and endangered species. this particular program is important for the state of hawaii. we have more endangered species per square mile than any other place on the planet, we claim 75% of the endangered plants in the united states. we are the most unique

archipelago. a watershed, which was an easement which is strategic watershed. this was done in 2010. this produces the large part of fresh water that contributes to the recharging of the aquifer to the forests and streams that are preserved and sustains the residents of the island. the island may not be nobody known to many of you, but in 2009, this island was made famous with the canonization when the father st. damien has been canonized. a project in idaho which connected important ecosystems

and habitat and important timber lands and preserved grizzlies and gray wolves. in idaho, mcarthur lake corridor which protects acres of critical private timber land. utah benefited it to the dry lakes. it protects not only the timber lands but a scenic view and kept press teen a whole area. as of 2010, two million acres have been protected. it is important to realize that it is not taken from private owners, but it is in partnership with all the parties, including the states to preserve these important habitats for the future. this is the kind of program that we are always talking about and looking for, the preservation

through partnerships. not simply government going in and buying things. this is making it possible to some of the actual individuals and communities, the neighbors, for example, in idaho, are able to get together with government to preserve important easements. it is for this reason that i ask to vote for support of this amendment. and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back. mr. simpson: i rise in reluck ant opposition to the gentlelady's amendment. while the program is a good program and most people support it, the problem is that it takes the money out of the wildfire suppression program. anybody that has been watching the news for the last five months understands the wildfire problems we have in texas, new mexico, arizona and as noaa has

told us, those wildfires are going to climb into the pest later in the year this year. i suspect, september, october, november there will be a huge fire suppression costs. we can ill afford to take the money out of the fire suppression program. it would be nice to increase the funding for those environmental programs but if they burn up, we aren't protecting them. we tried to fund the wildfire suppression at a 10-year average, which we have done and i would be hard-pressed to take money out of that given the situation we find ourselves in this year and i oppose. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from hawaii. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the

noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. number 44. the clerk: page 76, linge, national forest system, $1 billion. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk, mr. chairman. the chair: the clerk will specify the amendment, please. number 44. the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 56

printed in the congressional record offered by mr. gosar of arizona. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. gosar: that's the wrong amendment. 44. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. gosar, insert after each

dollar amount the following, increased by $10 million, page 80, line 1, insert after the dollar amount the following, reduced by $16,600,000. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. gosar: i would like to offer an amendment. this summer over a million acres of forest land and 600,000 of federal, state and private lands burned throughout the american southwest. they are costing taxpayer dollars and will cost millions more in rehabilitation in the months ahead. these fires reinforced the urgent need for landscape restoration. this is to fully fund large scale treatment to our national forests which will reduce

wildfire risk and specifically, my amendment increases the landscape restoration program $10 million, fully funding it at the budget request, authorized in fiscal year 2009, it was designed to encourage science ecosystem restoration. the program recognizes the management will be most effective if it is planned and in a collaborative framework through private-public partnership. as an offset the amendment decreases the related funding account by $16.6 million. the hazardous fuel account is fund s at $334 million in the underlying bill, $80 million

above the president's request. the c.b.o. confirmed my amendment does not increase the outlays. forest treatment focused on hazardous fuel reduction maybe appropriate, they do not achieve the fire protection and ecosystem restoration that are required. it is roughly 80 million acres of forest that are overgrown and catastrophic for wildfire a cording to the data base. we cannot afford the status quo using taxpayer dollars to prevent unnatural fire like the wallow fire in arizona and new mexico. we must change our priorities and treat our fires at the scale these fires are occurring. congress must fund large scale forest restoration treatment if

it was to reverse the treatment of our forest while reducing the risk of catastrophic fires. the partnership facilitated through the program empowers private industry to do important science ecological work by minimum ms.ing the risk to the taxpayers. in 2010, projects were selected. these projects are located in nine states, montana, arizona, california, colorado, florida, oregon and washington. in the case of arizona, the project calls for the forest service to contract with sfriss capable of restoring tense of thousands of acres per year. it estimated 2.4 million acre project will be completed at no cost to the federal government. because of this promise, this

project is garnnered support in the arizona house delegation and senators kyl and mccain and unprecedented range of environmental groups. and fully funding for the forest landscape restoration program ensures that the projects which are needed, will continue to move while allowing them to expand into the 80 million acres of overgrown and forest service lands across the country that needs to be treated. when the federal government partners with local government, private industry, together we can create jobs and safer environment for our citizens. landscape scaled forest treatments are the only way the country is going to make real progress. i urge my colleagues to vote yes

on the program amendment. and i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho rise? mr. simpson: first, i would like to note i support the program, cflr. this bill funds the program at $30 million. in the c.r., it was funded at $25 million. we supported it enough that we increased funding for it from the 2010 level through the c.r. and in this bill. the funding for this program has increased when other programs are being scut. the offset for this program is hazardous fuels and because of the budget authority and outlays the budget has to cut $16.6 million to pay for a $10 million

increase. it has been successful and i would argue that hazardous fuel funds get to the ground and make an impact before the landscape restoration program which could take years before a project is implemented. i understand and agree with the gentleman that in our bill report we state over and over that the forest service needs more active management at a much larger scale. the cf lmp r is not the only program. there are other programs that improves wild fire risks. we funded these at 2011 levels. i'm glad the program is working well in arizona but hasn't work in other areas of the country. other buckets of funding are more effective. as a result, i have to oppose the gentleman's amendment and i urge my colleagues to vote no.

the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. mr. gosar: mr. chairman, i ask for a roll call, yeas and nays. i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from arizona will be postponed. . the clerk will read. the clerk: capital improvement and maintenance, $378,088,000. land acquisition, $12,500,000. acquisition of land for national forests special acts, $955,000. acquisition of lands to complete land exchanges, sums to be derived from funds deposited by

state, county and municipal governments. range betterment fund, 50% of all moneys received as fees for grazing to remain available until expended. gifts, donations and bequests for forest and range large research, $45,000. management of national forest lands for subsequent uses, $2 million. wild land fire management, $1,805,099,000. slaying wildfire suppression reserve fund, $290,418,000. administrative provisions forest service, appropriations shall be available for purchase of motor vehicles, funds may be transferred for forest fire fighting, funds available for assistance in connection with forest and range land research

in foreign country, up to $5 million shall be available for priority projects, $4,000 is available for official representation expenses, $3 million may be advanced in a lump sum to the national forest foundation to aid conservation partnership projects. $3 million may be advanced to the national fish and wildlife foundation. funds value shal be available for a sub sustainable rule development purposes. $5 million million -- $55 million shall be assessed for performing fire and other facilities maintenance. $500,000 may be used to reimburse the office of general council for travel expenses. none of the funds may be reprogrammed without approval of the committees. department of health and human services, indian health service, indian health services, $4,034,322,000. indian health facilities, $427,259,000. administrative provisions,

indian health service, appropriations in this act shall be available for services as authorized by you u.s.c. 3109, nonindian patients may be extended heament care -- health care or indian health care facilities subject to charges. funds appropriated to indian health service shall not be subject to limitations directed at curtailing federal travel. none of the funds shall be used for any assessments by the department of health and human services unless identified in the budget. funds available to tribal or organizations through a contract may be deobligated and reobligated. none of the funds shall be used to implement the final rule published by the department of health and human services related to the eligibility for the health care services of the indian health service. with respect to functions transferred to tribes or tribal organizations, the indian health service is authorized to provide

services to those entities on a reimburseble basis. reimbursement for training or services provided by the indian health service will contain total costs associated with the provision of goods or technical assistance. the appropriations structure for the indian health service may not be altogethered -- authored without advanced notification to house committees. national institutes of health, national institute of environmental health sciences, $79,504,000. agency for toxic substances and diseased registry, toxic substances and environmental health, $74,098,000. other related agencies, executive office of the president, council on environmental quality and office of environmental quality, $2,661,000. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma rise? mr. lankford: i have an

amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. lankford of oklahoma. page 98, line 11, after the dollar amount insert, reduce by $2,661,000. page 158, line 25, after the dollar amount insert, increase by $2,661,000. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. lankford: thank you, mr. chairman. this amendment is about eliminating wasteful duplication in our federal government, specifically dealing with the council of environmental quality. this amendment would eliminate the funding for that council of environmental quality and transfer the savings to the spending reduction account. this amendment will result in about a $2.7 million taxpayer savings. specifically the council on environmental quality, if people aren't familiar with it, it's a council of one person with a budget typically around $3 million. throughout the council's 40-year

history it really has done little to demonstrate additional responsibilities other than what already is being accomplished by the environmental protection agency and noaa itself. former presidents have proposed a reduce in the budget for this council. this council blatantly duplicates the efforts of other federal agencies, as i already mentioned the environmental protection agency and noaa who are doing an excellent job in these same areas. this is an opportunity to be able to reduce unnecessary waste, duplications, streamline the bureaucracy and improve agency services to americans who fund these agencies. at this critical point in our nation's history, i recommend that we need to eliminate agencies like this and to be able to combine them to existing agencies and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. moran: i rise, mr. chairman, in opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. moran: mr. chairman, this is an organization that was established by president nixon, i think it was bill who was the

first head of it. what it does is to coordinate the implementation of the national environmental policy act. that act, as i recall, goes back to 1976, 1969. it was president nixon that put it into effect. the council on environmental quality does the national environmental policy act reviews. and it's a critical function. in addition to that it coordinates the environmental programs throughout the federal government. you didn't have c.e.q., you'd have to invent it. i know if we didn't have it we'd be creating it in this appropriations bill because this appropriations bill is replete with requests to the

administration to coordinate environmental programs, particularly those related to climate change. to avoid duplication. well, that's the role of c.e.q. the council of environmental quality is very inadequately funded. it's a relative handful of people. so the only thing that i can interpret from this amendment is that it's meant to be punitive. you're hardly saving any money and what you're doing is eliminating the white house's ability to coordinate environmental programs, to continue the same tradition that we have had since richard nixon. it's now been 40 years and no one up until now has thought

that the council of the environmental quality was not performing an important and valuable function. so i'm surprised that the gentleman would offer the amendment but i would certainly oppose it. it's one of these things that you're only going to realize the full value of it when it's gone. and the small. a money to save -- and the small amount of money to save when this is an organization that person for person probably does as much as any other people even in the e.p.a. or any of the other agencies of the government in terms of maintaining a consistent, focused policy on environment. i would really hope that this amendment would be soundly defeated.

it was funded in the bill, there was no criticism registered in the report with regard to the council on environmental quality. i know they have been reaching out, more than happy to go to any member's office. one of the people that, when you have local issues or state issues, they will respond, they'll explain the intent and purpose of the national environmental policy act and they want to ensure that the administration's actions are consistent with congressional intent. so this is not the kind of constructive amendment that we would expect to see and i would really hope that this body would

reject it. so i'll yield back my time but i'm stunned that this amendment would have been offered, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from minnesota rise? >> to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. >> i also oppose the gentleman's amendment. let me just give you a little more background on what the council on environmental quality does. ms. mccollum: it's focus is to make government more efficient and more effective. and it does this by interagency working groups in coordination with e.o.p. and c.e.q.. and it balances the competing positions sometimes even within government coordination. in other words it makes everybody come around the table and figure out how do we do in the most effectively for the american people? it brings, as ranking member moran pointed out, federal agencies, state and local

governments to the table, too, to say, how can we be most effective collaboratively in making our environment work better for america? and let me give you an example of one of the projects that they're woking on and it's solar energy. solar energy is booming here in the united states. and if we get solar energy technology right, we will be the leaders for the next generation in how we can have energy efficiency, energy independence through renewable energy. the solar energy industries the association works with this council and in the first quarter the solar industry saw -- installed new solar electric capacity, 66% growth from the same time frame from 2010. that's 3,000 megawatts of solar electric installed in the united states.

that's enough to power 600,000 homes. they worked with the manufacturing sector, the solar power sector, they work together and they caused this 33% jump in panel production. with the growth of solar industry, thousands of jobs have been created. in fact, solar energy creates more jobs per megawatt than any other energy source and according to the solar foundation's national solar job census, 93,000 americans are employed in the u.s. solar industry. the reason why i bring this up is that by not only helping to bring everybody around the table to figure out how to move america forward with this, the next thing they do is they work, as i said, with intergovernment agencies. so they work with the department of energy to issue loan guarantees for solar projects and manufacturing facilities, that's going to create 26,000 jobs. they worked with the department of veterans affairs to announce that they'll be installing solar panels in their medical centers,

one in oklahoma, texas, another in texas and in california. prior to this announcement, the d.a. had also been awarded -- the v.a. had aled been awarded -- had also been awarded for other solar panel dollars and they're able to control costs and do good things for -- things for the environment. the department of interior has approved solar permits on public lands which will provide enough energy for 70,000 homes. the department of agriculture promotes the deployment of solar energy on farms and ranches, working with people and folks out in the private sector. so, the list goes on and on. coordination is often the key to efficiency and so i just really think that the council on environmental quality provides america a way forward in making sure that our agencies are talking and being effective with

one another when it comes to collaboration on environmental issues, also reaches out to the local governments, but more importantly it works in the private sector to create opportunities for jobs. with that i yield back. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from wyoming rise? loom loom i move to strike the -- mrs. lummis: i move to strike the last word. and i would like to yield to the the gentleman from oklahoma to give him the opportunity to comment and i will reclaim my time. lambing mr. lankford: this was a wonderful description but the problem is it's the same responsibilities that e.p.a. has and department of energy has and noaa has and these are executive agencies and to say you have to watch over this executive agency

is one of the prime examples of why it is so difficult to combine agencies for efficiency. we have multiple bureaucracies and it would save us money. yes, this is a small agency, but another one of those prime examples why the executive branch has multiple agencies doing the same thing and we have to find ways to combine these. we are creating jobs. but the reality is we have to be able to find ways to save money and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. mrs. lummis: the underlying bill reduces c.e. q. to 2006 levels and caps their to 2006 levels. that means they will have a reduction in force, will lose three employees. i might point out, when i was

general counsel for the governor in my state, i also ran the natural resource is subcabinet and we were at the state level the mirror image. we were in the position of responding to nepa documents that were sent to us from the federal government to state agencies and as a state we are attempting to coordinate our responses to nepa documents to various state agencies, the agency that regulates water, the agency that looks after state land, the agency that does environmental quality in wyoming, the agency that does state forests and on and on. and so our natural resources subcabinet was the state equivalent and mirror image to what c.e. q. is in washington.

let me give you an example of what c.e. q. has coordinated here in washington and why it makes sense. we have seen in this debate earlier that fighting asian carp is an issue? the great lakes. they have brought the agencies together to combine efforts to fight this invasive species. they have coordinated and without the framework, it's hard to pull the army corps of gears, e.p.a. and -- engineers and e.p.a. with the states to have a shared response to a multi state, multi jurisdiction, multi level of government issue like the asian carp. that is something, i believe, that makes it appropriate for c.e.q.

i understand the frustration that some people have with it. but quite frankly, that coordination, when managed properly, allow the federal government to speak with one voice with their own disparity agencies and have different mission statements and that coordination is important. mr. chairman, for those reasons and for the cuts that have been undertaken in this bill, i do rise to oppose the amendment. and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from arizona rise? the gentleman is recognized. mr. flake: i didn't plan on speaking, but i couldn't help after hearing the comments and i would gladly yield 30 seconds to the gentlelady if she wants to explain further, i haven't heard this used as a positive measurability, i'm sfr arizona

and i like solar power, but since are we using a positive, the number of jobs it takes to create a megawatt. will it be seen as a positive in the future if it takes more jobs? is that a good thing for the economy? is that a jobs program? it baffles me sometimes at the arguments that are made as to why we should keep programs like this going and keep -- i would be glad to yield time to the gentlelady. mrs. lummis: the point is that we are creating -- ms. mccollum: we are creating jobs usingless jobs. and these jobs that are being created are improving our economy, our ability to create internationally and these jobs use less energy.

so we aren't investing in nuclear power plants and aren't investing in coal burning. mr. flake: i thank the gentlelady, but that is precisely the opposite of the number of jobs per mega what the. if -- megawatt, if it makes more jobs, that is the way we should go. this notion we have to keep this going because it creates jobs, it just baffled me. i rice in support of the gentleman's amendment. we ought to save money where we can and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from oklahoma. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. >> i would like to ask for a

recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amente offered by the gentleman from oklahoma will be postponed. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 98, line 17, chemical 17 and hazard investigation board, salaries and expenses, $10 million. offices of and-a-half hoe and hopi relocation, $7 million. institute of american indian and alaska native culture, $7 million. smithsonian institution salaries and expenses $626 million to remain available until september 30, 2013. charnlte for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment.

the clerk: amendment number 14 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. broun of georgia. brown mr. broun: my amendment would revert the funding back to 2008 levels. this is asking the smithsonian to tighten their belts. mr. chairman, this country is broke. we have spent all the money in our bank and then some. we have to prioritize where we can afford to spend money where we simply cannot afford to. asking the smithsonian to scale back their spending to levels of 2008 is more than reasonable. i urge my colleagues to support my amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. moran: i rise to claim time in opposition to this amendment. charkte the gentleman is

recognized for five minutes. mr. moran: the smithsonian institution is the world's leading museum complex. people from all over the world come to washington oftentimes with the principal intent of seeing the significant seasonian, but it is invarybly part of their trip to our nation's capital and something that every member of the legislative branch should be very proud of. in fact, we should spend more of our time in those museums. they are extraordinary. every single one of them. they tell the story of irnigse's -- nation's origin and they reflect the evolution of knowledge of the things that are real vanlt to our very

existence. and in addition to the traditional museums along our national mall, we have the national zoo zoo, again known throughout the world, but this amendment that would cut $55 million would wind up eliminating 600 positions from the smithsonian because 90% of numesr museums are personnel. we are told that given the existing costs that have continued to increase over the last four years, not just personnel, but not only energy costs but maintaining the finest museum complex, that the smithsonian would have to close

at least one, if not two, major museums or the national zoo. doesn't seem to me that in order to save a relative fraction of a bill, this bill is about $27 billion, in order to save, what is that, half a percent, that we would want to close one or two of the finest museums in the world. now, if you did abolish 600 federal positions the smithsonian, you would have to pay severance costs and create personnel management turmoil for years. you would be saying to the smithsonian, which makes us proud for the quality and really

the efficiency of its operation, you would would be saying, sorry, but we don't think that you should be a priority. the reality is, if you would ask the federal taxpayer, not just the people in this region, but all over the country, how important the smithsonian is, seems to me they would make it a priority. last things we would want, it seems, our visitors come from our districts to washington and we have a sign on the front door, one of the major museums, sorry, closed due to short-term budget cuts. now, i trust that that would not be the final reality, but if we

were to pass such an amendment when we vote on this, i think it would send a signal. it's the wrong signal. just as uncertainty the debt ceiling is sending to the rest of the world, this is the wrong signal to the people who work so hard at the significant seasonian and wrong signal to send to our constituents. kind of shocking we would have such amendment, frankly. the committee has looked at every line item, has cut every place they could with very few exceptions and we point ded out those exceptions, but the committee, i'm sure, did not consider closing down one or two of our major museums on the national mall in order to save a

fraction of 1% of the cost of this appropriations bill. so i would very, very strongly oppose this misguided amendment, mr. chairman. i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. holt: to follow on my good friend from virginia, i must say this is almost incomprehensible. the smithsonian as a collection of museums and the park that my colleague talked about is half the picture. and indeed, if any of those facilities are closed, there will be a lot of unhappy families from georgia and tennessee and montana and all

the 50 states. but it's a lot more than that. the smithsonian is a collection of research centers that goes beyond folk art, jewelry and pandas. the smith seasonian observatory, one of the finest collection of our world in understanding the universe, borrowed colorado island in panama in the middle of the panama canal, probably the principal research center for understanding the workings of our biological world, yes, there will be a lot of unhappy families if this amendment were to go through, but moaning those

600 positions that would be lost no doubt would be some of the finest scientists in the united states, in fact, in the world. and there would be a lot of unhappy scientists around the world who would wonder what in the world were they thinking of? what in the world were they thinking of in washington, d.c., when they cut back on these research efforts. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from wyoming rise? mrs. lummis: mr. chairman, to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. . mrs. lummis: i would like to point out that the request for this was $110 million more than is appropriated and that we as a committee did cut this current budget by $10 million already

and i'd also point out something that's more philosophically based and that is my own personal view and it's shared by many of my colleagues on the republican side of the aisle that we should be fending federal functions while we are here in washington and acknowledge that certain functions really can be handled as well or better by the states. and that the states created the federal government, not the other way around. and so we should be deferring to the states for everything that is not specified either in the constitution or is purely a federal function. the smithsonian institution is a purely federal function. it is something that was given to the united states of america,

that federal government and the people of this country through us are stewards of and i believe it is appropriate as a purely federal function that we fund it adequately. now, we have, as i point out, reduced its budget during these tough fiscal times but as something that is purely federal in its approach and the benefit to our nation and indeed to the world that is provided by this great gift that was given to the people of the united states of america centuries ago i do rise in -- ago, i do rise in opposition to the amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho rise? mr. simpson: mr. chairman, i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. simpson: mr. chairman, i rise in opposition to the amendment. this is truly one of the less

thought-out amendments i think that's been proposed to this bill. the smithsonian is truly a gem in this country, ask the american people. if you look at what they are doing and the important role they play, a lot of people think that it's not important if you don't come to washington. the smithsonian doesn't do anything, they only operate museums here. that's not the truth. the smithsonian operates all across this country. if you look at what they're doing in digitization of their -- digitalization of the things they have in their museum and their reaching out to schools and so forth, it is making an amazing difference. go on their website and see what they're doing in terms of the applications for your iphone that are making a difference in people's lives, plus the research that they do on a variety of things around this country is just amazing. if the gentleman wants to reduce this by, you know, everybody can take ads 58 million hit, i guess, but this is -- a $58 million hit, i guess, but this is below what the president

asked. another $58 million hit on this would be a substantial hit. they also raise $158 million in private funds. that tells you the private corporations and citizens all across this country love what the smithsonian does and they do a fantastic job. if you want to get the public outraged, slice the smithsonian's funding so that when someone comes here to visit washington, maybe a trip they planned on for quite some time, and they want to see the number one thing they came to see, guess what it is? air and space museum. and the other things that occur here. but the smithsonian is so much more than that. go look at what they do at the national zoo. go look at what they do in their collections that they have. this is an incredible organization. i'm only sorry that in this budget climate, and i appreciate the gentleman's desire to address the budget deficit that we have, everybody wants to do

that. there are some things that we should maintain. the smithsonian is one of them. so i would hope that not only would the members of this body vote against this amendment but they would vote hopefully unanimously against it and in support of the smithsonian and the work they do for this country. and i appreciate the gentleman's time and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from california rise? ms. woolsey: mr. chairman, i -- yeah. i ask to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. woolsey: i just wanted to say that i am the coolest grandmother in this country as far as my grandchildren are concerned. not because i'm a member of the house of representatives and have been for 19 years but because i live within walking

distance of the national zoo. they come here, they cannot get enough of the national zoo that is sponsored by this smithsonian. and then when they've had enough of the national zoo and know they can come back the day after , they are on their way to the smithsonian and it depends on their age and they've developed over these years from wanting the simplest entertainments at the zoo to being very curious and wanting to know more and more about it, my 7-year-old grandson that was here over the fourth of july is committed to be a scientist from what he experienced over this last week and few times he's been here before. it's a learning experience and if you don't have grandchildren, maybe you don't get it. you think that this isn't important to the people in this country. but there is nobody that comes into my office of any age that

doesn't thank me for the experience they've had at the schmidt sonian. i remind them -- at the smithsonian. i remind them that it is their entity, it isn't ours. they pay for it through their taxes and they are proud to do that. i stand here against that amendment and in support of the smithsonian institute. thank you. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the gentleman from georgia. mr. broun: request a recorded vote, please. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia will be postponed. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 101, line 22, facilities capitol, $124,750,000. national gallery of arts,

salaries and expenses, $112,185,000. repair restoration d repair, restoration and renovation of buildings, $13,938,000. john f. kennedy center for the performing arts, operations and maintenance, $22,45,000. capitol repair and rest -- $22,455,000. capitol repair and restoration, woodrow wilson international center for scholars, salaries and expenses, $10 million to remain available until september 30, 2013. national foundation on the arts and the humanities, national endowment for arts, grants and administration, $135 million. the chair: the clerk will suspend. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? >> mr. speaker, i have an amendment at the desk.

the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment offered by mr. walberg of michigan, page 105, line 7, insert, reduce by $10,600,000 after the dollar amount. page 158, line 25, insert, increase by $10,600,000 after the dollar amount. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. walberg: thank you, mr. speaker. tonight i'm offering an amendment that would reduce funding for the national endowment for the arts for fiscal year 2006 levels. in february during the consideration of h.r. 1 i offered a similar amendment to cut n.e.a. funding which the house adopted. the underlying bill funds the national endowment for the arts at $135 million which is $19.7 million reduction from last year's levels. i commend chairman and the committee for recognizing that this funding has precipitated at an unsustainable rate.

since 2008 the n.e.a. has received increases of over $10 million each year including $50 million in funding from stimulus in 2009. these spending increases have coincided with annual trillion-dollar deficits. my amendment would take funding levels back to fiscal year 2006 levels and $124.4 million. if accepted this cut returns $10.6 million to the spending reduction account. i want you to know i believe in the fine arts and of course i know that that's defined by individual standards. in the past i was privileged to serve on a symphony board for a time as the chairman of the finance committee. my early years i was brought to the chicago symphony orchestra

by my parents, school trips and otherwise and appreciate the impact that the fine arts can have. tramp through art museums conscious -- tramping through art museum -- museums is not foreign to me as well and enjoying much of which i see. but a time when our government must cut federal spending, at a time when our taxpayers cut and fix and repair and alter their own lifestyles and their spending, the primary source of funding for the arts should be through philanthropy not forcing open the taxpayers' wallet without their choice. the national foundation for the arts does provide benefits to our country and helps fund our true fine arts. however we're asking them to only fund their true priorities and they can make those

priorities. we know that the public has questions about some of the programs that the n.e.a. has supported. i'm tempted to but i will refrain from giving explicit illustrations of funded programs , projects that they have undertaken with much taxpayer disapproval, but suffice it to say that in recent years the n.e.a. has funded exhibits that disparage religion, promote porn and support presidential campaigns. that is not supported by the general taxpayer and should not be. my amendment asks the n.e.a. to only fund their true priorities. now, if they want to determine those priorities, so be it. but if they want to determine priorities for youth concert series or young composers or you name it, that will be a choice

as well and i think most taxpayers would support those choices. our country is in financial hardship. and the sponsors of the arts should be sponsors of the arts, as i am. but taxpayers ought to know that we will expect them, like the rest of the programs and certainly the rest of society, to be efficient at this time. our country is in a financial hardship and we're not taking programs like the n.e.a. off the table, we're just asking them to establish priorities with reduced funding, yes, but an opportunity to efficiently convey to the taxpayers their understanding of what we're going through as well. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. moran: i'll rise to claim the opposition to this amendment.

the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. moran: thank you, mr. chairman. we're a great country, great countries understand the importance of the arts, they understand that it's important not only to communicate with one another, but to leave a lasting legacy for future generations. the arts have the ability to communicate the most fundamental aspirations of mankind. they have the ability to evoke compassion. they have the ability to invoke the kind of spiritedness that causes countries to show

undaunted courage, rise above the problems of the day in pursuit of far more noble national objectives. the value of the arts transcends anything that we can quantify in terms of dollars and cents. we should be extraordinarily proud of our national endowment for the arts. denise graves, who is one of the finest opera singers in the world, who can stir the emotions just by hearing her beautiful, extraordinary voice. she said that she grew up in washington.

where the kennedy center is. but it could have been the other end of the world. if she had not been able to get into a program funded by the national endowment for the arts. there are any number of men and women, young, middle-aged, old, who have come into contact because of the outreach that the national endowment for the arts has provided. and there are any number of communities across the country who by use of the arts, by setting up a theater, by pulling people together, by getting a small amount of money from the n.e.a., which is far more an endorsement than it is financial support, have been able to develop local

economies. we've heard from a number of big name performers now who said they got their entry the development of their career, through the n.e.a. some gave back by developing a theater in communities that they thought had seen their best days behind them and yet by uniting the community, it's clear now their best days are ahead of them because young people want to stay in that community. they're excited about the arts that are provided. this program does so much with so little. and yet the gentleman wants to cut $10.6 million, that's .03%

of nondefense discretionary funding. we had $174 million in the fiscal year 2011 bill. it was cut down to $155 million, ultimately, for f.y. 2011. now it's been cut another $20 million, down to $135 million. i know my good friend from idaho, the chair of the committee, wishes and knows it should be more. but i think most of us, when we reflect, understand that if we continue to take money from programs that provide so much to really the heart and soul of this nation, we will lose those abilities, those instruments we have to reduce the harshness

and rancor that divides us. it's the powerful media of the arts that enable us to transcend our differences. to appreciate real beauty. the truth that comes through the fine arts and the crace that enobals the human spirit. n.e.a. is a catalyst. it helps us create and sustain arts. doesn't really fund much. what it does is to spawn the arts. it generates investment in the arts. the gentleman mentioned philanthropy. there's a great deefl money out in this country. we're still the wealthiest country in the world, no matter how much people would like us to think that we're poverty

stricken, that we're seeing some of our worst days, we are a great and powerful and wealthy nation. philanthropy is the principal source of funding for the arts, but n.e.a. shapes much of that funding. the magnet for businesses. almost $7 -- almost 700,000 businesses involve the creation and distribution of the arts. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. moran: i ask unanimous consent for addition -- for an additional minute. the chair: is there objection? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. moran: i thank the gentleman and thank my colleagues. i do think it's important that we make this nominal investment in the cultural lives of our citizens and in our children's futures. i can't imagine how a nation as rich and prosperous as ours would not consider it a priority to provide funding for

the national endowment for the arts. there's too much that divides us as a nation. this is something that should be uniting us. democrat and republican, liberal and conservative, everyone can appreciate the arts because it inspires us all. because it inspires us to look past the parochial, the small-mindedness, to see the big picture to appreciate greatness. this amendment should be defeated and in it we should send a message that we understand what's important to the life blood of our national community. i yield back my time. thank you, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho rise? mr. simpson: to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. simpson: let me associate myself with the words of any

good friend from virginia and his comments on this. the walberg amendment would return the n.e.a. funding to the 2006 left-field lines. the n.e.a. is funned in this bill at $135 million which is a $20 million reduction from the fiscal year 2011 enacted level, a $32.5 million reduction from the fiscal career 2010 enacted level and a $10 million reduction from the fiscal year 2008 enacted level. i was asked earlier by a member, would you support just going back to the 2008 level? we could do that but we'd have to add another $10 million to it and we don't have it. this would take it back to the 2006 level, as i said. overall, the committee has cut $2.11 billion in this -- $.1 billion in this bill. this is on -- $2.1 billion in this bill. this is on top of what we cut earlier. i think this amendment is excessive. but i know for some people,

voting against any funding for the arts is not a problem. i'm not saying that's what the sponsor of this says. there are some people who believe that the government should not be involved in the arts at all. when we ran into problems, before i was here, maybe it was when mr. moran was here, i can't remember, but they ran into controversy with the arts and funding for individual artists. since then, the interior appropriations committee has done some working with the n.e.a., some reforms so we don't fund individual artists. we fund what the intent is, i think, of the national endowment of the arts. that is to get the arts out to the rest of america. if you're in, sometimes in a large city and that type of thing, you have access to the arts. but when you're in the middle of idaho, you don't have act ss to arts like they do in other

areas. one of the things i've been focused on is making sure that the arts get out to rural america so that they have an opportunity to see these art performances, whether they're the visual arts or the performing arts or other things but we need to get them out to rural america. if you want to come to boise, idaho, you will have missed boise, idaho in the summer if you don't go to the idaho shakespeare festival, partly funded by a grant from the national endowment from the arts. yes, they raise private funds, but part of the funding comes from the national endowment for the arts. the chairman was out in idaho last spring, i guess it was, and we toured around idaho and looked at some of the arts programs, the local art agencies that receive some funding from the n.e.a. and the

impact it had on their operations. we also went to jerome high school, where the idaho shakespeare festival, the actors that did the performances in boise at the festival toured the schools. and gave performances to students. and then they sat there afterwards and talked with the students about what it was to be in the performing arts. how you get into it. what the pluses and minuses of it were, and other things. they helped educate these students in these communities. very important thing. one thing we've done in this bill or a number of things we've done in this bill, there are a variety of popular programs, popular on both sides of the aisle. the american jazz masters program, the heritage fellowships, the big read program, shakespeare in american communities, are all -- all have their funding maintained, not at previous levels but at a level so that they can maintain these popular

programs. the chairman has introduced a new program that we're working with him on, exactly how it would work and what it would be, called our town, how the arts can help transform local communities and stuff through a grant program. so we've been working with him but i will tell you, the arts are important. and i think having a federal investment in the arts is an important thing to have. i'd be happy to yield to the gentleman. >> i thank the chairman for yielding. i want to make it clear, as i listened to the opposition to it, you didn't catch my train of thought. i'm not saying that the arts or the n.e.a. is wrong. i'm say it's time to make priority decision and certain priority decisions as recently as november of 2010 fund programs, fire in the belly, i won't go into the deprescription of it, "hide and seek" that could be considered

pornography, and was, an exhibit that was portrayed as that. mr. walberg: those are decisions, it is time if we're funding those, we ought to give the tax pay aerobreak and say, if you want to attend those or support those, do it through philanthropy, do it through initial sponsorship but not the taxpayer. mr. simpson: i appreciate the gentleman's concern. "hide and seek" program was not an n.e.a. program. that was not part of the n.e.a. so, we have a tendency to think that anything that is done in this country or this state or this community that is done in the name of arts is done by the n.e.a., an that's not the truth. so when we attack them because of "hide and seek," that's not an accurate statement. again, there have been times in the past when there have been criticisms of the n.e.a. because of -- mainly because of the individual artists funding

that went on. the committee has addressed that and made reforms working with the n.e.a. to make sure that those types of things are not funded. in this bill. that we don't fund individual artists. that -- the main funding of the program is to get the arts out into the rural communities. the american jazz masters program, the big read program, all vitally important programs that i think the american people like and i think members on both sides of the aisle like. i yield back the balance of my time. i move that the committee rise. the chair: the question is on the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee the speaker pro tempore: mr.

chairman. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house of the state of the union having had under consideration h.r. 2584 directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the committee has had under consideration h.r. 2584 and has come to no resolution thereon. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise snr mr. dreier: i spend to the desk a privileged report from the committee of rules for filing under the rule. the clerk: report to accompany house resolution 375, resolution providing for consideration of the bill senate 627 to establish the commission on freedom of information act, process and delays and information other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house and ordered printed. the chair declares the house in

the committee of the whole house for further consideration of h.r. 2584. will the gentleman from minnesota, mr. paulsen, kindly resume the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house of the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 2584. the clerk: a bill making appropriations for the department of the interior, environment and related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2012 and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole rose earlier today, an amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg is pending. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york rise? ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i move to strike the requisite number of words. the national endowment of the arts has a 40-year history of

investing in communities across the country to expand access to the arts. it has awarded 2,400 grants until all 435 congressional districts. the proposed cuts would have a crippling effect on a program that has been proven to work. how i feel about the arts, i say how thankful i am to be able to work in an arts building that is a masterpiece. but i'm going to be practical tonight. all we are interested in money and that's what i want to talk about. i hope that people will pay attention to what we get for that little bit of money. in f.y. 2010, the federal government invested $165.5 million in the n.e.a. for the purpose of providing funding to none profits arts organization. that funding created 1622.2

billion in total economic activity, supported 5.7 miltion jobs and listen to this one, generated to the u.s. generation, $12.6 billion in tax revenue. that does not include the state or local tax revenue. we spent $167 million and got back $12 billion. i defy anybody to tell me we got that return on any money we spend here. i wish we could multiply our money. investment opportunities like these are few and far between. we should be expanding our investment in such a successful programs. i'm the proud co-chair of the congressional arts caucus and supported the n.e.a. for 0 years. the arts caucus is composed of

186 bipartisan members who are committed to the growth and success for the arts and why? because the arts make a difference. the n.e.a. reached its peek level in 1992 but never fully recovered from a 40% cut in 1969 when once again people mischaracterized the work of the n.e.a. we have seen progress with the funding since 2008 but just last year the n.e.a. was forced to deal with a crippling cut. this year's appropriations bill will take effect. these cuts are not sustainable and do great harm to the success of the arts sector across the country. this widespread national support for the arts, including companies like bravo and what really happens for us that was

so good from westinghouse and they said they would hire people who had a background in art because of what they were able to do, using both sides of the brain. bravo has arts for children in this country. bipartisan u.s. congress of mayors made art a priority, saying federal resource else must be invested in organizations through their local art agencies with full funding of the federal arts and cultural agencies. in addition, i have a letter from 26 national art organizations urging congress to prevent any further reduction to the investment in our nation's arts and culture infrastructure and i ask unanimous consent to submit for the record. the chair: the request will be recovered under general leave. ms. slaughter: funding of the arts creates jobs. there are 756,000 businesses

that employ three million people. in my district, there are 1,229 employing 15 thourk -- 15,456 people. this brings nrm private and public money, which is important to make these programs survive and these programs are and economic goldmine. they spend money locally and generate money revenue and economic development. along with creating the supporting jobs, it supports our nation's youth. this is important that are markettable to the economies that drive our economy and push america. i have mentioned westinghouse. it fosters learning, discovery

and achievement. research has proven this is again a fact. research has proven these programs stimulate the creative subjective forces of the human brain. the chair: the time of the the gentlewoman from new york has expired. ms. slaughter: five minutes. may i ask for unanimous consent for two more minutes. the chair: is there objection? the gentlewoman is recognize dollars for two more minutes. ms. slaughter: doctors we have been told by the university of california davis, only doctors who understand what they hear and assess is music. high school music score higher in the s.a.t.'s. students with four years with art in high school have more points on their s.a.t.'s.

we are making investments. but they play important roles. they attract businesses. everywhere there is art in existence. presence of the arts can revitalize rural areas, inner cities, cultural tourism which brings in $192 billion a year to the u.s. economy. listen to those figures. i hope you are impressed as i are. it is exports to the country bringing in $30 billion. one statistic i find telling, in 2010, the attendance at three new york museums exceeded the attendance of all the new york professional sports team combined by over 300,000 visits. people are inchted to arts and they come again and again and

bring their families. along with all this is a great intrinsic value. i must say, art tells us who we were, who we are and who we hope to be. and if you think you are not affected, tell me what happens when you hear "amazing grace," america, the beautiful." please, please don't decimate this program in which we invest so little, but get back so much. i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island rise? mr. cicilline: i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. cicilline: we have to cut

spending, but at the same time, we also have to make the necessary investments that create jobs now, guarantee the future strength of our economy and renew the vitality of our communities and that's why we should absolutely reject this effort to reduce the nation's investment in the national endowment for the arts. our targeted federal investment in the arts through the n.e.a. is very modest and is really crucial to spurring the foundation partners through philanthropy and vol terrorism that help to sustain arts and investments all across this country. this investment in the arts becomes all the more important during a time when states and cities all across this country face great area and greater fiscal constraints and at the same time are searching for opportunities to leverage federal dollars and spur

economic development and job creation. i represent a state that has realized an extraordinary return on investments generated by the arts. in rhode island, the presence of the arts are sewn into the fabric of our communities and community. according to recent data, in just the first congressional district, more than 1,400 arts-legality related businesses employ 16,000 people and that represents 5% of the businesses in my district. as a formor mayor of providence i have seen the economic of arts and transform people and places. i know the benefits of the arts and enriching our communities and uniting them as well. arts nourish our soul. the united states conference of mayors sent a letter to the members of congress urging us to reject this amendment recognizing that arts create jobs and arts put people to work

and arts attract tourism revenue. arts are an enormous part of what fuels our local economies, bringing hundreds of thousands of visitors to our cities, generating activity in restaurants, hotels, transparency and hospital services. this not only strengthens our vitality but generates revenues. across our country, this is much more. it creates much more meaningful economic benefits and opportunities. during this period, we shouldn't neglect those investments with a proven positive rate of return and shouldn't siphon off the rate of power. the economy, come prizing 7 50,000 businesses and employing 3 million people and economic activity, cutting the national endowment of the arts undermines

our responsibility to create jobs and grow our economy and diminishes us as a nation. as one study demonstrates when we consider the cultural spending of $1.4 billion, a return on investment is nine to one, if we are serious about strength thing our economy and putting americans babbling to work and we have to be smart, with estimates indicating that every dollar of federal funds investment vested in the arts, further reduction in the national endowment of the arts is counterproductive and will move our nation backwards. we lose the immediate economic return on investments but this cut pushes our country further behind our competitors in the global economy. it was one of the great giants in the united states senate, senator pell, that led to the

creation of the national endowment of the arts in 1965, the program we are defending today. senator pell opened hearings on preliminary legislation by stating, and i quote, i believe this cause and its implementation as a worldwide application for as our cultural lives are enhanced and strengthened so does it project itself into the world beyond our shores. let us provide energy, a true renaissance, and the unstunted growth of our cultural vitality. senator pell said clearly that this disinvestment that we are discussing today for the national endowment of the arts, nearly 50 years later is a stark and appalling contrast to the renaissance and reawakening to the national endowment of the arts. they have been the farther for spending cuts in our schools and

federal level. it is in our economic peril that we deprive our youth and communities to their connection to the arts. i have seen on so many occasions -- if i could see -- have one more minute to conclude. the chair: is there objection? objection is heard. for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. woolsey: as soon as wednesday follows tuesday, you can count on congressional republicans to gut programs benefiting arts and humanities. it's as predictable as it is irresponsible and unwise.

it's the same old penny-wise, pound-foolish approach we've come to expect from a party that wants to spend lavishly on corporate giveaways while cutting just about every initiative that powers -- empowers the american people and improves lives in our community. i can't believe that while the nation stands on the brink of default, while republican stubbornness puts us lees than a week away from economic calamity, we're having a debate about funding for the arts that represents three cents, three cents for every $100 of nonmilitary discretionary spending. three cents, mr. chairman. believe me, the budget for the national endowment for the arts isn't breaking the bank. grants to support museums and theater companies are not what caused the huge deficit and cutting them will not put us on a fiscally responsible course. in fact, investment in the arts

more than pay for themselves. for every dollars 1 spent on arts program the country gets back $9 in economic benefit my friends on the other side of the aisle love to make arts funding a scapegoat. they never miss an opportunity to turn the spending debate into a culture war or referendum on art. but let's be clear. the arts represent a vital economic industry, a mainstream employer of millions of americans, and an integral part of a functioning society. the nonprofit art sector generates more, more than $12 billion in tax revenues and more than $166 billion in economic activity every single year. communities that have a vibrant artistic life are magnets for tourism and creators of new businesses that we know create jobs. there's also evidence that communities embrace the arts --

that embrace the arts tend to have higher real estate values, more civic activities and volunteerism, less crime and lower poverty rates. the arts are also a critical ingredient in the development of our children. research shows us that students receiving arts education perform better academically and are more likely to succeed in life. but despite all the ways that arts support the common good, republican leaders want to cut n.e.a. instead, mr. chairman, i think it's time we cut big oil subsidies and cut loopholes for corporate jet owners. arts programs have already take an budget hit in recent years and are trying to do more with less. if we can give billions in subsidies to oil companies that are already raking in record profits, then surely we can maintain modest investments in the nonprofit art sector that

makes a vital contribution to american life. let's stop blaming small agencies for a fiscal crisis that was caused by three wars and tax cuts for the people who need them the least. let's maintain robust funding for n.e.a. with that, i yield back the remainder of my time to the gentleman from rhode island. mr. cicilline: it is at our own peril we continue to cut funding for the arts. i have seen the power of music and dance and at ther to ignite the imagination of a young person that causes them to stay in school, follow their passion and realize their dream. today's global economy demands an even greater level of creativity, thinking and

entrepreneurship a 20th century skillset enhanced by exposure to the arts and daily life. i participated in an arts round table with c.e.o.'s a around the country who said that the scoifls problem solving and innovation were skills they were looking for in workers of the 21st century and the arts nourishes and enhances those skills. we cannot underestimate the importance of maintaining critical funding for arts to fuel our national economic recovery to grow our economy, teach our children and expand ourties course in these trying economic timesism strongly urge my colleagues to reject further cuts to the national endowment for the arts. we need the national endowment for the reawakening, quickening and unstunting the growth of our vitality and economic prosperity. the chair: the time of the gentlewoman has expired.

for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky rise? >> i move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five mins. >> thank you. mr. chairman, when we in the house decide how the taxpayers' money is going to be spent, it represents a statement of our values, a statement of our priorities. mr. yarmuth: and the question of whether we should adequately fund the national endowment of the arts speaks loudly to our values, it speaks loudly to our respect for the creative genius of human beings, it speaks loudly about our understanding of what the human soul is about. we've heard much documentation of the economic impact of the arts throughout our country. $165 billion annually in economic activity. i certainly can attest to the fact that in my community of louisville, kentucky, more than

20,000 of my constituents are involved actively, professionally, in the arts. we are one of the only communities that has resident theater, resident opera, ballet, children's theater, a vibrant visual arts community, it is one of the things that makes my community a community where the quality of life is significantly enhanced. it's one of those thins that brings people to my community. and so the economic importance of the arts is undeniable. but i ask again about our priorities. the amount of money we're talking about now, roughly $10 million over a period of years, we spent in the first few minutes of our activity in libya. the first few tomahawk missiles we launched there, that was $10 million. we spent $10 million in less

than one hour in afghanistan. less than one hour. so here we're talking about millions of jobs, supported by funding from the national endowment for the arts, $165 billion in economic activity. against all of the other things we do, where there is so little payback for what we spend of the taxpayers' money. but the two things i'd like to mention in addition to kind of the value added aspects of arts funded -- funding, if you think back over the history of mankind, what has survived of the great civilizations of this world? the only thing that has survived has been the creative product of the minds of men and women throughout history. literature. music.

architecture. painting. sculpture. these are the only things that survived. if you look around this glorquouse room we have the privilege of serving in, the famous painting of george washington, lafayette, the architecture that's represented here. this is all the creative product of the men and women of generations. this is what our soul speaks to the world, to yen rations to come -- to generations to come and this is what we're talking about funding. one of the greatest exports we have from this country is our cultural product. we export music, we export film, we export drama, theater, all of these things, activities funded by the national endowment for the arts. so what we say to our taxpayers, our constituents, what are your values? we can say, you know, those

tomahawk missiles are wonderful. i certainly understand that we need to defend our country. when we talk about our contributions to the history of mankind, humankind, it's undeniable that we -- what we invest, the small amount we invest in supporting our creative genius will be paid back many, many times over. so i am proud to stand here and support funding for the national endowment for the arts, opposing the walberg amendment, which would further cut the funding that has already been substantially reduced and stand for the values of the millions and millions of men and women and children who not only participate in artistic activities but also benefit immeasurably through enhanced quality of life in our country.

with that, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? >> i move to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> last month, i gathered almost 200 individuals interested in the arts and humanities. mr. holt: the turnout was impressive but considering their eagerness to win endowment grants, it was a reminder of how tight funding is for these critical programs. my friend poet paul muldoon read some poetry to the attendees and reminded all in his words, the n.e.a. and the n.e.h. are not properly funded, it is a national disgrace. now that was before the amendment that is here tonight

that would cut the n.e.a. even further. the n.e.a. and n.e.h. help ensure a well-rounded education and result in a well-rounded society. now of course the national endowment for the arts and national endowment for the humanities are different. but they are similar in what they bring to our nation. the arts and humanities inspire our children to ex-pler their own creativity and encourage positive development in the course of their educational careers. the arts and humanities are a fundamental component of our society and they indeed warrant federal funding. the arts and humanities help us know ourselves as a people. just a few weeks ago, here on this floor, the house approved a bill that increased spending for the department of defense by $17 billion. the total funding for the

endowments is hardly more than a percent of that increase. -- of that increase in defense spending that was passed. talk about misplaced priorities. i'm reminded of the often-told exchange between scientist robert wilson, the director of fermi lab, when he was testifying before the senate, and a senator. the senator asked with regard to a science experiment at fermi lab, whether it would help defend this country against the soviet union. replied dr. wilson, no, senator pastori, this will not help defend us against the soviet union but it will help make our country more worth defending. this amendment is based on the premise that arts and humanities are a luxury. the author of this amendment,

to cut the n.e.a. further, says america is impoverished. mr. speaker, i'll tell you what would leave america really impoverished is if we strangle the arts and humanities. we've heard what the arts contribute to our economy. the americans for the arts in its report arts and economic prosperity details that the arts support more than five million jobs, generate tens of billions of dollars in government revenue. arts are good for our cultural development, yes. they are good for our society at large and good for our economic development as well. i've heard from a number of my constituents on this matter and nearly every one has pleaded with me to preserve as much funding as possible for the arts and for the humanities. as one of them said, poignantly, quote, a nation

without culture is a nation without a soul. end quote. i strongly oppose this amendment and other efforts to strangle the arts and humanities in america and to defund the national endowment for the arts and the national endowment for the humanities. i yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? . mr. scott: i rise in opposition to the amendment. our focus ought to be on jobs and some of my colleagues have said, funding the arts creates jobs. we create lots of jobs, because not only are the arts supported but when you have restaurants and other activities that generate jobs all over the community. and our focus ought to be on education. those children who are involved

in the arts do better in school. we are trying to cut funding for the arts in this amendment and we can't ignore why all these cuts are necessary. last december, we passed a tax cut of $800 billion, $400 billion a year. we are looking to make cuts. most of the projections are we need $4 trillion in deficit rezucks, $400 billion a year. that's the same number, $400 billion tax cuts a year and now looking tore $400 billion spending cuts a year. when we talk about cutting the arts and social security and medicare and education and everything else, we cannot ignore all of these cuts are designed to preserve the tax cuts that we passed last december. and so to preserve those tax

cuts, many are going to millionaires, multi-millionaires and oil companies, we find ourselves having to deal with having to cut the arts. we should not be lulled into accepting caps. caps delay the inevitable. because caps don't cut anything today. when you start appropriating under the caps, in a few weeks or months, we find there is not enough money for the arts or head start or education or social security or medicare. when you accept the caps, you are ultimately going to have to make these cuts. we don't have any crisis today, mr. chairman, because some don't want to increase the debt ceiling. they say it is the responsibility of this congress. the debt ceiling acknowledges what we have already done. we need to pass it where we make

choices. do we want to cut medicare, social security and the arts to go to millionaires? i hope not. and we should defeat this amendment. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from minnesota rise? ms. mccollum: in minnesota we understand that the arts are an essential part of our ch economy and the number of jobs. the arts are so vital to our civic life, in 2008, the citizens of minnesota voted to tax themselves and dedicate part of their revenue to the arts. minnesota is the only state in the country where is there a dedicated public funding source for the arts. we passed a legacy amendment, hunters, conservation, parents,

seniors, all came together to say the arts along with preserving our environment is integral to our way of life in minnesota. in my district alone, the arts employ 8,000 people and the arts and culture industry contributes $830 million to minnesota's economy. investing in the arts makes economic sense and good public policy. as has been pointed, for every dollar spent by the n.e.a., $9 in economic activity is generated. we must make tough choices and i believe the n.e.a.'s budget has been targeted and has been shrunk enough. the n.e.a.'s budget has been cut 20% since 2010. our artists, writers, musicians, singers, dancers, photographers

and actors, contribute millions of dollars to our local economy and create a social space for us to come together. and we hear time and time again from the major corporations from startup companies, to health care companies to our universities that it is american creativity and space for the arts that allows america to move forward. i strongly oppose this cut and i reject any further attacks on the n.e.a.'s budget and i yield back. the chair: the question is on the amendment -- for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise. mr. moran: i rise to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. moran: you heard, if this was not -- i will explain, i

rose previously in opposition to claim the time in opposition and now i rise to strike the last word. mr. chairman, if this was not such a late hour, we would have had five, six times as many members rising in opposition to this amendment and i trust they reflect the general sentiment of the country. you know winston churchill at the height of world war ii was told by his budget director that to conserve money for armaments, they needed to cut the arts. and he turned to him and said, we do that, what is it in a we're fighting for? the arts reflect the highest

aspirations of our humanity. and in fact, in this country, they are a reflection of the true american spirit, our talent, our ability to communicate, our ability to relate to one another. now, let me be specific about what this amendment would do, because every single member of this body has a direct grant from the national endowment of the arts going to their congressional district. if this amendment was to pass, more than $100 million in non-federal matching funds for n.e.a. awards would be lost. the number of americans reached as a result will decline by 36 million. compared to the number of

america ns. the number of children and youth will decline. and, in fact, there will be a 17% decrease in state and regional partnerships. i think if the members fully consider the impact of this, they will realize this is one of the most effective federal programs that we have. we have a gentleman, he could be making considerbly more than he is making today in income, but he has chosen to devote his time and attention to lead the national endowment for the arts. he has suggested that given the fiscal situation that confronts us, perhaps we should reduce the

number of platforms for artists so as to save money, he has determined not to reduce the quality of artistic performance in this country. we have so many talented people, so much potential, and it is the n.e.a. that reaches out and finds that potential. all over the country, this is a fully national program. every single congressional district benefits from grants from the n.e.a. and those grants expand the economy, the focus of the grant and in fact, multiple times, i'm trying to recall the number, five or six times at a minimum, many times, 10 or 20 times, the amount of money that is contributed to a particular

artistic focus when the n.e.a. decides it is worthy of getting a grant. they have maintained their credibility. in fact, when they were under attack in the 1990's, they made sure that every grant passes a very high level of scrutiny. even though and most of us don't believe in censorship, they understand all the competing political pressures. they have navigated those political waters. the program that the chairman of the subcommittee referred to, it's a terrific program that really develops the best of what america is all about. this has been a long night. we have tried to fight the good fight over here against any number of efforts to cut

programs, to repeal legislation. this is one of the most important. i would urge this body to reject this amendment to show our support for the national endowment of the arts and really for the phenomenal artistic talent that it underscores and generates in this country. the chair: time of the gentleman has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes have it. for what purpose does michigan rise? mr. walberg: i request a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6, rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan will be postponed. the clerk will read. the clerk: page 105 line 14, national endowment for the

humanities, grants and administration, $135 million. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? >> i have an amendment at the desk, in the congressional record number 13. the clerk: amendment number 13 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. broun of georgia. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. broup broun my amendment would reduce funding for the national endowment of the humanities by a mere 10%. i stood up here and offered amendment after amendment trying to highlight areas of our budget that we can afford reasonable cuts. if you add all up those cuts, the federal government could save a significant amount of money. we are facing a fiscal crisis in this nation, a financial fiasco and if we can't make the cuts that need to be made, this country is going to go into a

total economic collapse. we are broke. they sell their luxury car. stop eating steak and lobster and eat hamburg and hot dogs. they turn in their membership to the country club. all those things are beautiful things, nice things, luxury things and we have a lot of luxuries that we have been funding through the federal government for a long period of time. but, mr. chairman, we can't afford to continue doing so because we are in an economic emergency as a nation. we are broke. we have unsustainable debt. we have unsustainable debt that's going to cause our children and grandchildren to live at a lower standard than we are today if we keep this up. mr. chairman, a number of years

ago, congress was sick and we needed a doctor in the house and i'm a medical doctor. government needs an intervention for its spending addiction and addiction medicine says if there is no denial there is no fix. if is an economic denial. we have to stop the spending. when a business goes under water, it's overextended, as the federal government is, what does it do? it lowers it's borrowing level if the lender doesn't do that. it starts trying to figure out how to reduce the debt. then it goes through every aspect of its expenditures and tries to cut expenses all across the board in every area.

the federal government needs to do the same. and then the business will look at how to raise more revenue. democrat colleagues say we need to raise revenue by raising taxes, but that will tax away jobs. we must create jobs here in america. and we create jobs by getting the tax burdenen and regulatory burdenen off of the job creators and small businesses here in america that are suffering and suffocating with the overburdenen of regulation and taxes. we can create more revenue for the federal government, not by -- we can create more revenue for the federal government not by raising taxes but by raising taxpayers. we do that by putting people to work and creating a strong

economy. it's absolutely critical for the future of this nation. we can't keep going down this road. the national endowment for the arts and national endowment for the humanities, i've heard all the arguments and for the smithsonian institute and other things that a lot of people think are very beautiful and nice, just like that luxury automobile. but we need to stop it. the future of our nation depends upon it. i'm fighting for america. i'm fighting for the future of our children and my grandchildren. funding for the national endowment for the arts does not need to be a priority in the midst of these trying times and i urge my colleagues to support a very simple request to reduce its funding by 10%. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back.

for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. moran: i think i'll wait. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from idaho rise? mr. simpson: i move that the committee do now rise.

an amendment has been offered. would not the committee of the whole committee of the whole -- mr. moran: if we rise now would not we take up the same amendment oh theck time the body is convened. the chair: the amendment will still be pending. mr. moran: thank you. the chair: the question son the motion that the committee rise. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee rises. the speaker pro tempore: frch. the chair: mr. speaker, the committee of the whole house on the state of the union having had under consideration h.r.

2584 directs me to report it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chairman of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 2584 and has come to no resolution thereon. mr. simpson: i move that the house do now adjourn. -- the chair: the gentleman from minnesota. >> i move that the house to now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question son -- the motion is that the house adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it.

>>, next on c-span, members of congress on negotiations on the debt limit. republicans participate in a tea party rally on capitol hill. later, a position on to de's briefing. members of congress take out their positions on staking out and raise meet federal debt limit. john boehner tried to raise

support for his new proposal. democrats talked about this. first, house democrats are following a meeting of the democratic congress -- a democratic caucus. >> our caucus continues to think that'd it is about putting it up in front of the american people. it is not just our national economy. this is about household economies. this is about 401 k's becoming 101 k's. i am getting calls to my office, what should i do with my money? what is going on?

how serious is this event? one of the members of our caucus stood up and said, i know what we need to do. we knew to have the president look at all of his options. we called on jim cliburn to say what he said to our office. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman. all of us are quite aware that the american people are now -time to this issue. they are very concerned about whether or not their retirement checks are going to continue to flow and hold their value. they are concerned as to whether or not their children are going to be in positions to continue the pursuit of their education.

they are concerned about the mortgages that they hold on their homes and what we will be doing here. whether what we do here will threaten the validity of those transactions. i have said to my caucus and i have said to others that anything short of a long-term raising of the debt ceiling, something that gets us through the next election, something that will bring stability to our communities as well as to wall street, and anything less than that, i am hearing this morning about a 30-day extension. some say a six-month extension of the debt ceiling. i do not think that will do what needs to be done for the american people and for this great economy of ours.

i would say to the president that if that is what lance on his desk, a short-term lifting of the ceiling, of the debt ceiling, he should put it on his desk next to an executive order that we -- he will have drawn up. with the same pen that he vetoes that short-term debt ceiling extension, and he should sign an executive order invoking the 14th amendment to this issue. i am convinced that whatever discussions about the legality of that can continue. i believe that something like

this will bring calm to the american people and will bring needed stability to our financial markets. that is the position that we are in. i know there is reluctance to do that. i will remind you in closing that back in the 1940's, a great debate was raging as to whether or not it made sense to integrate the armed services. president truman did so by executive order. that executive order still holds today. if we can do something as big as bringing stability to our security as we did with armed

services, we can do something big now. i would say to the president that short-term extension ought to be out. veto it if it comes to him. >> a very clear issue, the message to speaker john boehner. mr. speaker, house republicans have failed to govern. failure is not an option for our country. therefore, you leave it to the president to take whatever action is within his power by his right under the constitution to move this country forward and make sure that americans do not suffer the consequences of your failures. george washington did not let a

winter's cold deny the people of the colony's a chance to become the united states of america. abraham lincoln did not allow the intransigence of a people to keep this country together. john kennedy did not stop the threat of letting a nuclear war from keeping this country safe. barack obama should not allow an economic crisis for a contrivance of house republicans to keep the american people from being able to pay their mortgage, send their kids to college, keep their retirement accounts at full value and keep the dollar at its true value. at the end of the day, should americans find that they are paying a higher mortgage because of the contrivance of republicans on this issue? should americans find that the

republic -- americans find that their retirement accounts to drop as they did a few years ago. drop again because of the contrivance of republicans on this debt crisis. should americans deny their children go to college because they cannot borrow money to send them to a good school. other presidents have taken the lead. we believe that republicans through their failures give you very little option but to take the lead. we hope that republicans will understand that the american people are telling them, you are not handling this the right way and we need someone to step forward. >> thank you. i will sum up by saying, they are the most poignant thing that happened said to me, a woman from my district said, what is it that people do not understand in washington d.c.?

we are being pushed up against the dark abyss of uncertainty as it relates to our livelihood, our jobs, our future. a small group in washington, however newly arrived, and full of themselves at this point, cannot lead this nation over a cliff. that cannot happen. we have to take the kind of action that will be required to keep the american people secure. we are not being governed week to week like a third world nation, but in fact the preeminent economic, cultural, and social leader of the world has got to act like it is. that is what requires action. no more walking away.

no more pulling out. get the job done and get america back to work is what the public wants to see. we will take questions. >> [inaudible] >> i think that the dark cloud of uncertainty with the debt ceiling only being still hanging over everybody's had, our caucus is adequate -- is adamantly clear, if by chance the republicans come up with the votes on their own and there is a short-term deal that goes to the president's desk, he has said that he will veto that. i know we have a great concern about that because of the ramifications for what that

means about the united states for the first time in its history to default on its credit. jim cliburn said that he should have his pen right next to it to envoke the 14th amendment. >> [inaudible] >> clean. increases. we would have to see what it looked like. not if it continues to postpone or put the debt off. how does that do anything for certainty in the economy? we are going to take this up in 30 days? 90 days? 120 days? what does that do to the markets? what is it due to uncertainty? what does it do to job creation

if we keep on repeating groundhog day. people cannot reach a decision. it is time to act. >> [inaudible] >> because this is the administration of hope. what gives me hope. >> [inaudible] >> as the leader indicated, we are getting down to decision time. we do not know what the other side is going to do. they have walked away from everything including their own leaders proposals.

a clean debt ceiling vote. we need to get back to the work of putting america back to work. focus on our deficits and focus on the job creation that we need to have and move the country forward. that is what we prefer. we do not know whether or not that will happen. if something is on his desk, he can have this. he has taken a position on this already. circumstances could change. we just want to let him know that his caucus is standing behind him. >> [inaudible] comeill senator reid's plan over here? we have to keep as many options over as possible.

will boehner's plan succeed? we do not know. if boehner's plan does not succeed, it is assumed that this will give the opportunity for harry reid to send a plan over here. there are not many alternatives. it will probably pass with more than 180 democratic votes to go to the president. >> when the president says that he is not interested in revoking the 14th amendment. he is saying that i am not interested in being the first in the history of this country to do something that has not been tested. it says that our debts are valid, and therefore we will follow through and pay them. the republicans have taken us into the twilight zone. we have never been here before.

just as i do not believe that george bush wanted to ask the congress and the american public to bailout wall street, we needed to do something to deal with a catastrophe that was going to hit so hard on the average american family. did the president believe that the republicans would take us into the twilight zone a week away from d day? i do not think so. if we get to d day, will andy body experience what obama did? just like nobody experienced what lincoln did or washington did. they have to make a call. what we are saying to the president is, do not let a manufactured crisis by house republicans' drive us deeper into the twilight zone when we can walk out of the twilight zone. warren buffett will walk out of the twilight zone.

the average american family will not walk out clean from this twilight zone. just as the president took out osama bin lot and in a way that some presidents -- osama bin laden in a way that some presidents would not have done it, their failure has given you the license to do whatever it takes to not let american families go into the abyss. >> he will not allow the republicans to hold the american people hostage, which is what they are doing. >> [inaudible] >> yes. >> [inaudible] >> whoa, whoa, whoa. this is like deja vu all over

again. let's start out with where we -- what we are for. we agree that the big approach was probably the best approach. we get the greatest number of democratic votes. those negotiations, they walk away from. every single subsequent phase of any negotiation between republican leaders, non- partisan, between republicans and democrats, even within their own caucus, they have walked away with. we are in the minority. we are faced with very few alternatives. the we've said it was given alternatives of a boehner plan or a reid plan, we would vote for the reid plan.

not all democrats would vote for the reid plan, but the vast majority would vote for the reid plan. >> we have to deal with the fact that we as democrats believe that politics is all about compromise. the reid plan is a big compromise. the reid plan takes revenue off the table. it also takes entitlements off the table. we were big on entitlements. they were based on revenues. what that does do is provide for about $5 trillion in cuts.

as a remember -- as a member of the biden group, he takes those cuts that we discussed and put them into his plan. it also provides for a 12-member commission to study debt relief as well as deficit reduction going for it. it is a long-term extension and that is where we are. >> [inaudible] >> i speak with the white house often. i have not spoken to them today.

>> [inaudible] >> they are in our caucus. they have representatives here all the time. they are very much aware of what jim had to say and the way it was received. the leader was in the room as well and heard very clearly what he had to say. the president has been very clear that he would not like to go with this option. he has been very clear about that. what we are saying is that if a small group is that intent on destroying government and is intent on saying that they do not believe that there is any ramifications for their responsibility, then we have to have a fail-safe mechanism. we believe that fail-safe is the

14th amendment. >> [inaudible] >> we would rather have everybody coming together and focusing on a clean bill and get on with creating jobs. that is what needs to be done. >> [inaudible] >> the boehner plan? a better question would be, how many republicans does he have? they have not been able to put their own people together. i do not think given what jim clyburn already said what the assault on medicare and social security and the drastic cuts they will be doing with no balance or revenues, very little votes will be there. i know it is cloaked as a balanced amendment. those that have look at --

looked at it say that it does not do that. briefinge day's news from senate democratic leaders that say that john boehner's deficit reduction program will not receive any votes from democrats. we will hear from harry reid. >> i believe it is time for the house republicans to face facts. they are struggling to save a tea party bill that is not a balanced solution. at the end of the day, it does not matter if speaker boehner's bill passes or fails. we need to meet in the middle of the road. people ask me, where is the room for compromise? that is what we have done. we have compromised. the bill is written to take on

the problems the democrats had and republican had. it meets our goals on medicare and social security. it is a good bill. it is a compromise. it does not contain revenues. we feel comfortable with the cbo. we need to $40 cents trillion. -- $2.40 trillion. it is rarely the first run through what we wind up with. it is fairly easy to do. that is what we call tweaking

edit it is done fairly easily. we will continue to add savings. we are confident that we will reach our bottom line of raising the debt ceiling. the bottom line is this. we are running out of time. it is time to get serious about compromise. >> thank you, senator reid. on monday night the speaker said that he had a plan. on tuesday, his plan was downgraded. downgraded by the ratings agencies that a short-term extension of the debt will endanger the american economy. it will cause us to go to a downgrade in our credit report and an -- a raising of interest rates. the boehner plan was downgraded by 100 members of the speaker's

own caucus. i do not know where they are today. i hope they will pause and reflect on where our nation is today. we are six days away from our deadline. six days away from our first default on our debt ceiling in american history. this is one of it includes spending cuts that we voted for. it includes an effort to extend the debt ceiling debate beyond the theory of the next election campaign and to give our economy a chance to get back on its feet. it sets a process for us. it is a responsible approach. we're urging republicans the to step back, but their caucuses aside put their caucus pledges

the site and but this country first. we have got to get busy and roll up our sleeves. >> the plan is on life support. it is time for him to pull the plug. >> even if the speaker is able to borrow and steal his way to 217 republican votes, if it tree mills announced dodger in the senate. the president will never sign it. there are wasting precious time. weaker reing closer to catastrophic defaults. come a time since he have to throw red meet. let's give something real done. yesterday's in an attempt to rally the caucus, the

republicans played a tip from a movie. in the scene, if they chose to inspire their house freshmen. one of the crux is a pep talks -- crooks gives a pep talk before they bludgeoned to men and bludgeon them in the leg. in the movie, the protagonist say "people are going to get tariffs but they have to go ahead and do it anyway." this is your house republican majority. this example aside, we think speaker gaynor is a good name -- speaker john boehner erica is a gois a good man purities shelling to rein in the caucus instead of leaving the house. he is being led by a friend in his thought is that things

defaults is ok. while he should not and cannot let a small flock of house republicans' lead the whole nation off a cliff. the plan would lead a defaults hanging over our heads for the next several months. it could even cause a downgrade. senator reid's plan gives the potential to finally break this impasse. our bill is the better bill. even when it comes to spending cuts. in the battle of budget scores, and the senate deficit reduction bill is a clear winner so far over an alternative by speaker john boehner air. aside from avoiding default in

the more long term, we have more. they have no basis. what they are defeated, it is the only option standing between us and defaults. we think republicans to give this a long look implants did go a long period wishes speed this up in and a right now. >> like everyone here, i have received thousands of calls and e-mail some people across my states of the past 24 hours. they are scared. they cannot understand what it is not getting solved. they're demanding that congress get together and get it done. i visited a senior center where a relative is staying. i cannot get through the lobby

because of a number of people. this was a committee hearing that i just chaired. they are overwhelmed with concerned with veterans about what will happen to them if we do not come to resolution. they go and answer king -- they got an answer. there is no question in the country for members. now it is time for him to ask where is the country? where are the seniors and the families and the veterans? what is the best thing to do? we have come to the table with a compromise. we have given up some things we have insisted on. they have these cuts and no

revenue. most importantly, it gets as out of the chaos and crisis. the plan leaves us and that for months to come. it is not just about the tea party they able to yell about what they were unable to. veterans deserve better from living in the uncertainty that this debate is bringing on. that is why his proposal is so important. compromise. they are disappointed. now is the time to stand up for our country. we call on them to work with us to get a compromise the path so that every american can sleep tonight. thank you. >> if he is able to get his bill passed, is there a way you

can alter and? >> is to be altered if he gets over here. quite how? >> how? >> i want to work as closely as i can with the minority. i am being very honest with the. -- with you. we like our bill. we will stick with that until someone comes up was something better. >> they will need to get it through the desk. what is the drop state? >> probably some of these. >> visit today? is it tomorrow? is a friday? magic things can happen under

the right circumstances. it appears quite clear that john boehner was --he can juggle things around. it does not matter. that is a flawed piece of legislation. it does not dissolution. no one believes that. they know it does not solve the problem. no one believes that is anything more than a big wet kiss to the right wing. i mean the tea party. it is too bad it is being read by a small number of people. >> at this late date, it might be less with the jump in their plan.

make you thinkng that theory is not its solution. every democratic senator will vote against it. it is true. whether tonight, tomorrow, or the next day. the john boehner plan will not pass. it is not a solution. everyone knows the. that.was >> will you -- when will you make that decision that was at the appropriate time. >> would you bring it to show that it cannot past acts >> i can have a boat in a matter of minutes. -- a cannot pass? >> i can have a vote in a matter of minutes. they vote on it for whatever

reason. we are weighing in on it. we are on top of this. if they get that over here, it'll be dealt with. beyond this plan. they will vote against it. >> there are obligations. >> that is something the secretary of treasury will do. it is not up to us. we know it is a disaster for our economy. thanks everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> meanwhile, a tea party activists rallied in support of the bill known as cuts cap and balance. the bill was tabled by the senate. this is one hour. >> we want to thank you coming to the rally today. let me hear it. we are here to tell our senators that the people of america want them to what? >> hold the line. >> called the line. we're going to start to the congressmen from texas. congressman gomer? here he comes.

>> thank you. thank you for coming out. we have a lot of work to do. the senate keeps saying no, try it again. we have had a lot of people say why do you not come to an agreement? our leadership has another proposal trying to move closer to what the senate says they will do. the senate has not passed anything. the senate passes something, of the house should not be rushing to try to meet them somewhere down the road. for those of you who like to

look at what numbers really mean, let me help you. cbo is not helpful with the scoring of the bill that we are supposed to take up this week. they said if only saves $850 billion over the next 10 years. actually, we are told that the number will be working on. we'll get it up to $1 trillion over 10 years. it is a big deal. the current course we're all, we will have added 15 trillion dollarsto $60 trillion over 12 years. if we can keep cutting $1 trillion over that deficit every 10 years, then in 150 years we can balance the budget.

we can all come out of my 207th birthday and had a celebration. if we are able to raise it to $2 trillion over the next 10 years, it is even better news out all maybe one header 37 -- i will only be 137 years old. i know the hearts of the republicans i am serving with. did they want to do the right thing. they really do want to do what is right for the country. people are saying this is not the best place for a fight. let's wait and have the fight on the debt ceiling.

now we are on the debt ceiling and we are told this is not the best place to fight. but wait until november of 2012. >> boo. >> we have never quit fighting. those who founded this country 1/3 supportednly the king because they were afraid of what free them may mean. about 1/3 did not mean anything. american change the world. we can do the same thing. i appreciate your support. i appreciate you being here. do not question motives of the repubicans you meet with.

they want to do right. thank you so much. god bless every one of you. [applause] >> thank you. what to read during today's dads we're telling them to what? -- what are we telling them to do today? >> all the line. emint.ister in jim de >> we have another year to date to turn things around. boy do we have a bite. every generation of americans have had to fight for their freedom. for us, it is about our debt.

that is what last november was about, to get control of the spending and return to a constitutional limit of government. people like you and all people like you have made the difference. they came because people took to the streets. they demanded, republicans, conservatives, that was and for what they believe them. a few weeks ago, we did not seem to be going anywhere. we got together with groups from around the country. we farmed the pledge websites. it is the largest coalition of conservative groups as i have seen. we're able to do something they said we cannot do, get a bill in the house and pass one that

solved our problems. only if we cut spending tofd ay. this bill passed the house and came to the senate. quickly come at the american people saw it was something they wanted. is 66% thoughts cut, a cap, and balance was a good bill. now we are in a crisis. we have got to hold the line. we have to stand strong. it cannot lead down the people that elected as last november. we need to do the fiscally responsible thing. if we go past the august 2

date, without cutting spending, we're not only one to lose our aaa rating, but we're what do those our country to bankruptcy. the presence at call your congressman. when you call them. tell them to hold the line. we cannot borrow more money. a few people can make a difference. you already have. and they be our last chance to turn america around. thank you for being here. [applause] >> thank you. what are we going to do? >> hold the line. >> i am the youngest member of

the senate. i just turned 40. the only bad part about being the youngest senator is stopping the car did when you go into -- is you get carded when you go into vote. i was elected because of tens of millions of americans. people from my own state have come to the conclusion that the budget government has become too big and too expensive. it has neglected the principles. it is that this congress and the first place.

this tax the people too heavily and regulated them. and there is a risk associated with concentrating too much power. they deliberately created a governments they are in charge of a few bass and things. there were wasted measures. it does not include the power to regulate every aspect of our existence. we would not be in a position where we would have accumulated trillion in debt.

we find yourself in this position. there are problems on this walk. if we do not raise a, problems will ensue. to be raised to quickly, as we have done every single time in the past, make it is a raging problem. it could be much worse. that is why i wrote to this act. just a few days after i entered is that, it was introduced in the house of representatives.

they passed it. it is the only proposal for not having the right proposal. they have yet to submit a single bill to address this issue. ours is the only show in town. did they let does have a vote? they did not. they cannot handle it. they cannot handle that the american people were in support of the underlying balance. they tabled its without any discussion. the table does along with the democratic members. the chance to come up with the deal that they could cram down our throats. recall that distortion.

it is bad policy. i ever in an entire book about the needs for a balanced budget. it was the freedom of agenda. it'll make you week. there is the idea of a balanced budget amendment. we need to push for tomorrow. with your support, we can make it stop. we can. we must. we will.

got less america. >> thank you. we are proud to but this rally on for the american people. we're not professionals. we are americans. we know your message may still be heard loud and clear to hold the line. now we have a great patriot and marine. mr. jim martin. >> we say hold the line when the seniors have to leavlive within their line. there is a tsunami that hit the hill in 2010. about 60 folks are looking for a new line of work.

they say cut back on the out of control spending. looking. i am from kentucky. it is my honor to introduce senator paul. [applause] >> thank you. every day we get closer and closer to a crisis. it is not the debt ceiling. we are spending $100,00 a second. we are borrowing $40,000 a second. it is out of control for . the proposal will cut $1 billion appearan.

we are spending a billion dollars and i were. that is insignificant and not meaningful reform. the john boehner your proposal will add $7 trillion dollars to the debt of the next 10-years. that is unacceptable. that is unsustainable. these plans never balance. i will only support a plan that balances a budget. thank you. >> water relented do? -- what are we going to do? hold the line.

>> thank you. it is wonderful to be here. there is very little that is subtle about me. i ran for congress a couple of years ago. i felt like i was losing my country. both political parties have marches down a path for the increase the size of government and hurt the rest of us. we have a president right now who is bankrupting this country. we have a president to is destroying what makes it great. we have a moment in time to fix it.

the republicans pass the bill. it was not easy. passed a bill cut, cap, & balance called -- called cut, cap, & balance. it was not easy. that plan is the only shot we've got. i am a freshman. maybe i am not naive. unless we four's republicans and democrats to balance their budgets every year, they one of. the only way we can do it is to force them. we have to do the spirit