romney, speaking yesterday in nevada. >> why is the obama economy so tepid? how has it failed to put americans to work? he will be giving a speech in a couple of days. i know that it is coming. and 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, they are not working. [applause] we are now using smart phones, not pay phones. is adent obama's strategy payphone strategy and we are a smart phone world. we have to change what he is doing. he is taking quarters and stuffing it into the pay phone and cannot figure out why it is

not working. it is not connected, anymore, mr. president. coast of that was mitt romney, talking about his jobs plan yesterday in nevada. -- host: that was mitt romney, talking about his jobs plan yesterday in nevada. guest: with it in a very modern, competitive, fast-paced, changing economy. the the old kinds of policies and rules, centralized types of government, washington knows best, just does not cut it in today's economy. so, we need more policies that empower individuals and entrepreneurs.

if you want to continue to get that type of innovation and is unable entrepreneurship, government has to get out of the way. particularly when you look at what is happening on a global level in emerging countries around the world. perhaps they are not major competitors right bell, but they are competitors. they are cutting taxes, eliminating capital defense taxes, simplifying the tax system. and getting out of the way, really, of regulatory relief and reform. capital being as mobile as this is, it will go to the lowest tax friendly haven.

pakistan, a few years ago, they had major plans in place to put their entrepreneurs out to attract investments. i still argue that we have the most creativity in the world and we do not have the corruption issue that many of these countries do. still, we need to be getting better. and if we are not getting better, we are getting worse. we are doing a good job at attracting capital, outside investors, and corporations, doing business over there and building facilities in this country. host: and twitter --

guest: they can. they certainly can't. right now they are hamstrung by government, in terms of burton's and regulations. the cost of federal regulations as 1.75 trillion. small businesses are effected more than large businesses. small businesses, a very smallest, those of 20 employees or less, have incurred regulatory burdens of $10,000 or more. so, yes, small businesses can compete on the international level, if they are given the opportunity to do so. certainly, more small businesses are competing in the international marketplace in terms of selling their goods and services abroad, but again, there are some issues and

regulations, and paperwork, and burdens involved in the process that are needing to be fixed, and needed to be streamlined. h., karen kerrigan is president and ceo of the small business and entrepreneurship council. she has also been involved in the women's on to producers inc.. she participated in the u.s.- iraq business dialogue, and joined a bipartisan debt reduction task force in february of last year. let's go to the telephones. if you are a caller that is an owner of a small business and want to weigh in, you can do that. here are the numbers to call.

host: joseph, in abilene, texas. democrats line. >> my name is joseph. i have a couple of commons. i would like to say that if i were a republican, i would be happy to vote for rick perry. he is a -- is very good with money. the state invests wide sweep it wisely. i'm not a republican. i have big political issues with the republican party. since i am a democrat, and we are talking about the economy and job creation, i will tell you that the economy has been run by closed doors. basically, our economic decisions have been made behind closed doors.

all of this information is classified, probably. it is not given to our democratic president, who we elected democratically, president obama. i do not think he has never really had a chance, and had all of the real facts of our economy, and is not capable of making the decision because he does not have all of the facts. guest: the president has some very smart, and very bright advisers that he works with, and work for him. you know, i think the information that he wants to get, he can get his hands on. i do sense from a caller that he is right -- there is a lot that happens in washington that impacts the economy, and impact business, that we just -- the average small business owner, the average american, does not

know about. if you look at the regulatory agencies alone, but they said, there are 420,000 regulations go into the business -- to the system. -- through the system. most small-business owners did not know how the process works, if they can have input, and before they note, there are required to fill out paperwork, or comply with some rule that impacts their business. so, the size and scope of government is such that there is a lot that is happening that we do not know about, and certainly transparency is a huge issue, and there has to be more down to give individuals access to the system, and from a small business perspective, we are fighting to get more input into these regulations. we want more of the agencies to have to be able to convene round tables, before they finalize a row, they had to listen to

small-business owners. they will listen to how it would impact them, and either they decide not to the regulation, or they move forward with the regulation that perhaps might have alternatives for small businesses, or perhaps they are exempted from that regulation. it is interesting that the caller did bring up rick perry. he just entered the race, and, clearly, texas has been very successful in terms of its policies, in terms of tax policy, in terms of legal reform, and some of the other pro-business reform the state has done to attract business and investment, and also a huge number of people into that state. the state is growing phenomenally. we have a small business survival index that ranks the states. people can go to our web site to see how states rank.

texas ranks three on our index. they're very competitive. they do quite well. i think rick perry will be one of the candidates that have crossover appeal to independents and democrats. i mean, we will see, and he is not, with a big proposal like mitt romney or jon huntsman, but i think it will get quite interesting after tonight. host: is anyone emerging as a front-runner among small- business owners for the gop nomination? guest: i did not think so. we have not done any polling to see if that is the case, but from what i hear there are some pepper for one or the other, some that hope there are other contenders to get into the race, looking for that elusive candidate, but now i think we are beginning to see more specifics. we are beginning to see governor mitt romney's plan.

jon huntsman put out a plan. the candidates are beginning to articulate more specifically how they stand on the issues. perhaps, after tonight's debate, and perhaps if there are additional plans that are released, and if the candidates have the opportunity to articulate specifics in their debate tonight and moving forward, there will be. right now, there is no front- runner. i would say that. host: arnold, another small business owner in memphis, tennessee. guest: good morning. morning. good i'm skeptical about rick perry. when you call back the layers, the majority of the well-paying jobs have been a result of the oil industries that have kept a lot of the other jobs are minimum wage jobs with no

benefits. i'm not sure what that is doing for folks. beyond that, you say you represent really small businesses, and i have been a small-business owner for a long time, and i'm in trade organizations, and our discussions are never about regulations that are coming down, or tax increases. that is not the kind of things that we talk or worry about. i hear that, but nobody in small business that i ever talk about covers those things with their concerns. entrepreneurship, at its core, as uncertainty. that is a big part of it. if people have ideas that they want to explore, i do not think they think about regulations, and whether taxes will be increased two years from now. that never seems to come up. host: arnold, what kinds of conversations are you having with fellow business owners?

caller: what can be done about demand. the fact that lending has contracted. how it is impossible to get small business loans. guest: right. well, i wish small business owners were not talking about taxes and regulations, but they are talking about these things. particularly, when you are looking -- one example is the new health-care bill. the health care law, the patient protection and affordable care at -- they are concerned about what that is doing for their cost of coverage. it continues to go up, and not down. there are concerns on how the regulations will be written, in terms of their -- the employer mandate. they are concerned about what makes up an essential benefits

package, and whether that package is much richer than what they currently offer, which would drive their costs up. they are concerned about the health care tax credit that was passed as a part of this bill. many of them do not qualify for it, or they say it is too complex. we did a survey that found that only 7% of business owners actually utilize the health care tax credit, which is quite low. and the regulatory front, you know, it might vary depending on the industry, but if you are in the agricultural sector, manufacturing, many of these sectors are very concerned about regulations in the pipeline, and how they will impact their business. i do have to say, the top issue is revenue, and demand, and

increasing revenue, and then -- what was the addition he brought up? and access to capital-letter access to loans. that continues to be a major project to capital. -- access to loans and capital. those continue to be issues. the business owners then i talked to do talk about the role of government, and its role -- that i talk to do talk about the role of government, and the potential burdens as well. host: karen kerrigan is our guest. we were just talking about the republican debate that is tonight. here are the details. 8:00 p.m. eastern time at the rate in california -- great library in california -- the reagan library in california.

host: last year from andrew, an independent scholar in los angeles. -- and independent caller from los angeles. caller: [unintelligible] host: we are having trouble to understanding it. i understand you're talking about the post office. let's go to our guest. the senator brought it up yesterday 1 folks from the post office appeared before a senate committee, and there was concern about saturday's service being stopped, and how that could hurt small businesses. our small businesses.

with potential closures and ?utbacks nex guest: that is an issue we have not heard much about. perhaps as it becomes more of a reality, we will hear more from business owners, by i i am one that says there may have to be some changes. this has been an ongoing issue. in terms of fiscal stability, and its ability to really survive in the modern economy, with people paying more bills online, and more electronic transactions -- anyway, that is something we will be listening for as it becomes more of a reality, to see whether this will have a major impact on small business owners or not.

i have not gotten one e-mail on that issue yet. host: james asks from twitter -- guest: we have to start with the big one, the health-care bill right now. there are multiple regulations in the new health care law that are impacting small businesses. one, for example, the grandfather regulation or rule that they put together. when president obama signed, or talked about the bill before it became a law, he said you can keep the health-care plan that you currently have. we will not take that away. so, small business owners, when that issue was in the law, we thought that to mean that the current health care plan that we have right now, even though they

read all of the new rules, we will be able to offer the insurance plan that we currently have right now. well, that is not the case. this is going to be huge for a lot of small-business owners. again, they will have to meet all lot of these requirements of the packages, whether it is the new essential health package that will be richer than what they currently offer, if they currently offer a consumer- directed plan, or a health savings plan, you know, whether those will be legal plans when all of these new regulations are written. that is a major issue for a lot of small-business owners. the employer mandate in the new health care law -- i would get rid of the individual mandate -- that will impact point to 1 million self-employed

individuals. some have insurance, some did not. this will have a huge impact on their ability to grow. host: we had done a congress watch director with "public citizen. , he talked about the dangers that he perceives in rolling back regulations. the obama administration it is in the process of rolling back regulations. let's listen to what we have to say last week. guest: we have experience with that a number of times. we just experimented with radical deregulation in the financial-services sector, and the banking sector imploded. it destroyed itself. before we had good regulation of good drugs and medical devices, those are the days of snake oil, where anybody could sell you anything from the back of their truck, and there was no

effective market. the point here is not just that things were not saved, but the market itself did not exist or broken down. so, there was no market for companies to do research and produce safe, effective, sound trucks, and so there was a government regulator overseeing that government. until you have somebody separating the good from the bad, bad behavior does not go punished, and bad behavior will win out over the behavior. host: david r. tisch, speaking on washington journal -- on " washington journal" west 3. guest: i do not think anyone is talking about radical deregulation. the president is basically looking at outdated regulations, ways to streamline the system for small businesses and all size businesses.

perhaps they could get rid of some things that really are not necessary in the modern economy. so, that type of review should happen on an ongoing basis. we think there should be codified in the law, and all agencies should be doing that every day on a regular basis. if there are applying new regulations, they need to look of the things that are not needed. there is legislation to make this process permit. -- permanent. but the president has done is not radical. getting 500 recommendations, $10 billion worth of small -- cost savings, when you have a $1.75 trillion deficit, we need to bring some common sense to the regulatory process. we need to do cost-benefit analysis, get impact from small

business owners to find out the direct and indirect consequences. what are they for our economy, small businesses, competitors, workers? what are we doing? there are a lot of regulations on the books, and modernizing, streamlining, bringing common sense to the process, it is very important to get our economy back on track. host: frank, on staten island, a republican. caller: democrats want high- speed rail. republicans want to build the border. why no build a border from texas to california and throw a high- speed rail on it? we have been losing the war on drugs for 30 years. legalize marijuana.

tax it, and take that money and put it into a special, for just for social security, or for health care. i think if we could come to some sort of consensus, and some sort of mutual agreement, we can get the economy started. host: let's leave it there and get a response from our guest. guest: i agree. there is room for common ground. i do not know if the franc plan will fly on capitol hill in terms of legalizing drugs, or even -- i get what he is saying about the high-speed rail, but even if we look at infrastructure projects, and our crumbling infrastructure, and what we need to do to upkeep the bridges and the roads, etc., that definitely is important for the competitiveness of the u.s. economy, but we would argue as

representing small business honors, and construction companies, that if you have these types of projects, there should not be requirements or it should not be strongly suggested there project-labor agreements. these contracts should be open to the entire business community, and they should not have these conditions placed on them. that way, you get the best value. you will open these contracts to more small-to-mid-size businesses, which we should have if we have these infrastructure projects. host: john is a business owner, and joining us from philadelphia. good morning? did we lose them? we lost compared let's go on to saying louis, missouri.

dee, a democrat. caller: the clip he showed from david and stole the thunder from my point, but not entirely. i believe in a community that at -- i live in a community that has been impacted by regulation. there are so few people and so few regulations with regards to how they dispose of their material, that my community is impacted by these "small businesses" and the lack of regulation that exists for them, and if it is not the lack of regulation, it is the lack of manpower that our local governments actually have to

monitor their activities because of the political impact of some of these small businesses. host: linda writes on twitter that she thinks the bulk of regulations do not apply to small businesses and are geared more toward bigger companies. guest: there are two things. no one is saying that we will got all regulation, and there is not a place for regulation when there is a problem, a severe problem, or if there has the market failure. so, regulation does have a place, and, certainly, we're not for getting rid of all regulations. we think there is to be common sense. host: the caller sounded like she believed more regulations should be in place. guest: right. there are some regulations and

actions that really needs to be more in the state and local governments. they need to step ahead and provide that type of framework for the regulations, -- stepped up and provide that type of framework for the regulations. if someone. washington at this epa, or what -- is someone here, in washington, at the epa, or some organization is going to be more effective. there are a lot of regulations. you have workplace regulations, health care regulations, a range of not only federal regulations, but local and state regulations that do impact small businesses. for the really tiny businesses, for those working from home, someone that is maybe not labour-intensive, they will not feel the weight and the burden of regulation. they will not have so many

requirements placed on them, but even if you look at the direct impact of regulations and the indirect impact -- certainly, when you regulate a large corporation, there are certain things they have to do. they will raise prices. they will do a number of things. this has no direct effect on the economy. so, certainly, regulation of large industry will impact, or does have an intent of small- business owners and consumers -- impact on small businesses and consumers. host: let's get one last call in. marshall is a small-business owner in illinois. caller: i think the problem has nothing to do with regulation. deregulation actually hurts small businesses because of a

level playing field. i think this is politics mixing with business. and the reality is it is the demand. if our customers have more money, they spend more money. if you deregulate things, it is the bigger businesses and their rich, small businesses, an advantage over the genuine small businesses. i did not think this has anything to do with regulations. the statistics show that companies are sitting on more capital than they have ever had. how do they have that in this regulated world? this is a ploy from a political perspective. i am an independent. who cares to the president is. i am doing business. i do not have a political bone to pick with anyone. host: let's get a response. guest: in terms of corporations sitting on cash, they are sitting on a lot of it, several trillion.

certainly, the state of the economy, a lot of uncertainty, that is driving that. we need these corporations to be spending this money. the average u.s. >> wool leave the last of this and go back to the house. they're gaveling in for work. do gentleman from califo [captioning performed by national captioning institute] ps the speaker pro t the title of the concurrent resolution. the clerk: house concurrent resolution 67. concurrent resolution authorizing the use of the capitol grounds for the district of columbia special olympics law enforcement torch run. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california, mr. denham, and the gentlewoman from the district of columbia, ms. norton, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california.

mr. denham: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.con.res 67. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. denham: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. denham: house concurrent resolution 67 would authorize the use of the capitol grounds for the district of columbia special olympics law enforcement torch run that will be held on september 30 this year. i'd like to take this opportunity to thank the gentlewoman from the district of columbia and ranking member of the subcommittee on economic development, emergency management and public buildings for introducing this resolution. i am pleased to be a co-sponsor. as in years past, the torch run will be laurched from the northwest terrace of the capitol. the special olympics is an international organization that is dedicated to enriching the

lives and children with disabilities through athletics and competition. the torch run began in 1981 when the police chief of wichita, kansas, saw an urgent need to raise funds for and increase awareness for the special olympics. the torch run was quickly adopted by the international association of chiefs of police. today, the torch run is the largest grassroots effort that raises funds and awareness for the special olympics program. the event in d.c. is one of the many law enforcement torch runs throughout the country and across 35 nations. this year about 50 different local and federal law enforcement agencies are participates in the day's event and more than 1,500 law enforcement officials will be honoring the special olympics athletes by completing the two- mile run. i ask my colleagues to pass this resolution and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the jo

from the district of columbia. ms. norton: this marks the 26th annual law enforcement torch run to benefit the district of columbia special olympics. the torch relay event is a traditional part of the opening ceremonies of the special olympics which take place at catholic university in the nation's capital in 2011. this event has become a popular event on capitol hill and is an integral part of the district of columbia's special olympics. the torch run participants will assemble at the u.s. capitol building on the west steps for opening ceremonies and then proceed to run or walk a two-mile course to fort mcnair, also in the nation's capital. each year approximately 2,500 special olympians compete in over a dozen events and more than a million children and adults with special needs

participate in special olympics worldwide. the goal of the games is to help bring mentally challenged individuals into the larger society under conditions where they will be accepted and respected. confidence and self-esteem are the building blocks of the special olympic games. the special olympics district of columbia has been operating for over 42 years, providing services to a wide swath of d.c. residents, and i'm pleased to support such a worthy organization and event. i urge the house to also support concurrent resolution 67, and i yield -- i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. denham: mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to hos concurrent resolution 67.

those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative -- mr. denham: mr. speaker, i demand the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question will be postponed.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess for a period less than 15 minutes.

>> the single most talked about problem was too many regulations. all that produced a kind of caution that's keeping the private sector from growing and ex-opinioning. with that, i'll see if anybody else would like to -- >> we don't hold the president responsible for problems he inherited. but we do think he ought to be responsible for making the economy worse by throwing a big, wet blanket over job creation. we're ready to work with the president to make it easier and cheaper for job creators to

create private sector jobs. a good way to start would be for the president to send to congress today the three trade agreements sitting on his desk since the inauguration which would create $10 million bel to $14 billion in any exports and put farmers and manufacturers to work selling overseas what they make and grow in the united states. >> somebody asked me earlier what i want to hear from the president tomorrow night. something different. something different than what he's been saying. because what he's been saying and doing hasn't been working. the president's policies continue to make the economy worse, make it more difficult, more expense toiv create jobs. there are two million more unemployed people today than there were when he took office. gas prices have doubled, the federal debt is up by 39%, food stamps have gone up by 41%, the numb of people on food stamps and health care costs have gone up. that's this president's record.

that's high i think the american people want a change of direction. i hope the president will say something different tomorrow night but from everything we hear, it sounds like it's going to be more of the same, which is more job-crushing regulations and policies and we all heard it from our constituents and small businesses in our state, making it more difficult for them to get people back to work. >> i just want to draw the line between the reality of the red tape and regulations coming out of this administration, versus the rhetoric coming out of this administration. in july and august alone, there have been 1,200, other 1,200 proposed and finalized regulations at a cost of other $17 billion. the white house conveniently forgot that when they said over five years they were going to try to eliminate regulations and save $10 billion over five years. so the reality is they have added in two months alone $17 billion in regulations and

these regulations continue to be a heavy wet blanket over our economy. >> as i travel my state, in addition to the historic 100-year drought and wild fires everybody where, i heard people talk about their concern that unemployment remains unacceptably high and thousand they -- how they believe the short-term fixes coming out of congress are creating more uncertainty, more debt, more questions about taxes an the future of our tax policy, and thus keeping the very people who are sitting on trillions of dollars worth of cash, who would create jobs if they were properly incentivized, keeping them on the sidelines. rather than quick fixes or get-rich-quick schemes like we get out of the white house, we need consistent policies, starting with tax reform. >> the president is expected to announce a proposed exemption

of the payroll tax break. i'm curious, is that something the republicans think has been successful and are likely to support as one of the initiative he is has? >> as i said earlier, we're happy to listen to the president's proposals and take them under consideration. >> with the argument being made here, i'm wondering why you choose not to have a formal response tomorrow night. >> there's going to be plenty of response to the speech tomorrow night, i assure you. >> would you like to talk about comprehensive tax reform? >> let me say this about the joint committee. failure is not an option. the committee is structured to succeed. we have put very serious people on there who are interested in getting an outcome for the country and we fully anticipate they'll meet their goals and

we'll see whether they can go beyond that. we know they will meet their goals. >> we'll break away from this briefing. the house has gaveled back in for more legislative work, we'll take you live there now on c-span. extend the generalizes of preferences and for other s the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, will each control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i yield myself such time as i may consume. mr. speaker, this bipartisan legislation which renews the nearly 40-year-old generalized system of preferences is a vital part of a robust trade agenda, an agenda that makes american companies more competitive and increases american exports. g.s.p. is an important tool for boosting economic growth and job creation. just last week we learned that on the whole there were zero jobs created in august and that the unemployment rate remains above 9%.

over the next several weeks, congressional republicans will bring several bills to the floor that will address the shortage of american jobs and help promote job creation. this legislation is an important component of that effort because g.s.p. is critical to the competitiveness of many american manufacturers. having more competitive american companies means creating and supporting more american jobs. the lapse of this program since the beginning of the year has unnecessarily imposed higher costs on american manufacturers and consumers at a time when we can least afford it. the g.s.p. program is the largest u.s. trade preference program and provide duty-free treatment to nonsensitive imports from over 130 developing countries. many u.s. companies source raw materials and other inputs from g.s.p. countries, and the duty-free treatment of these imports reduces the production costs of these u.s. manufacturers making them more competitive.

nearly 3/4 of all materials are raw materials, components, parts or materials used by american workers to manufacture goods in the united states for both con summings here and export. according to the analysis, approximately 8 ,000 jobs are either directly or indirectly associated with the importation and use of g.s.p.-eligible imports. the clear connection with jobs reinforces how important it is that the program is renewed. many of the jobs supported by g.s.p. imports is in michigan where the unemployment repains two percentage points above the national average. the lapse in the program has forced employers in michigan to pay over $9 million in unnecessary duties. instead of paying unnecessary duties, these employers could have been paying $9 million more in needed salaries. the legislation renews the program until july 30, 2013, and permits importers to apply

for duty refunds for eligible products imported since the program's expiration on december 21, 2010. this retroactive renewal will provide a timely infusion of capital to u.s. manufacturers that have faced higher duties and higher production costs since the program expired. it will allow them to compete with manufacturers abroad who have access to such input. i note that it will not add to the deficit as the costs are fully offset. i'd like to thank my colleague, ranking member levin, to find a path -- for working with me to find a path forward. given how important this is, i hope our colleagues in the other body act quickly. i want to emphasize how important this is for american manufacturers and their employees by creating and supporting american jobs. it's a valuable part of an aggress iver, pro-growth agenda and i urge my colleagues to support this legislation and i reserve the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield myself such time as i shall consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. levin: i rise in support of h.r. 2832. unfortunately, today we are acting to rectify only one wrong in the republican agenda of disregard for workers and economic recovery. the generalized system of preferences, g.s.p., that we extend today for 22 months, should never have been permitted to lapse at the beginning of the year. the andean trade preferences program should also not stand expired. and importantly, it is inexcusable that the trade adjustment assistance that we approved on a bipartisan basis in 2009 has stood expired since february. the only reason we are

considering this legislation today is because house republicans have been unwilling to support a simple extension of the expanded program. they have been unwilling to support a program targeted at helping unemployed americans get back to work. this at a time when more americans, more americans, have remained jobless for a longer period than ever recorded in our nation's history. in f.y. 2010 alone, more than 227,000 workers took advantage of t.a.a., receiving assistance such as case management, training, and income support. and there is broad support for the program, i quote just one such evidence. a letter circulated by the u.s. chamber of commerce, the national association of

manufacturers, the business round table in may, 2011, in may, 2011, states that, and i quote, t.a.a. is as vitally important today as it has been over the years. it helps american businesses get into exporting and is designed to give displaced workers the new skills and resources they need to re-enter the 21st century job market. accordingly, we urge congress and the administration to find a way forward to ensure that the u.s. has in place an effective t.a.a. program to support u.s. global economic engagement, end of quote. i support the g.s.p. program and the legislation before us today. that program is an important tool in u.s. trade policy. it is a means by which the u.s. can help developing countries

to capture the opportunities and meet the challenges of trade and of globalization. 129 developing countries participate in g.s.p. and depend on it to spur economic growth. this includes some of the poorest countries in the world. moreover, g.s.p. benefits americans, i emphasize that. in fact, the majority of u.s. imports under g.s.p., approximately 65% to 75%, are imports used to support u.s. manufacturing, including raw materials, parts, and components, and machinery and equipment. this program is important enough that it should not have been allowed to lapse and now can be considered on its own merits. it appears that the prospect is that the senate will act on

g.s.p. by adding t.a.a. if that's the path for renewal of t.a.a., the republicans have an only fwation to ensure that it happens immediately as a primary action. the republicans often talk about our languishing trade agenda. what has been languishing is action on trade items ready for action. g.s.p., t.a.a., atp a, languishing at the hands of the republican majority here, while action has been under way to address the shortcomings of the bush trade agreements. i am confident that each of the programs can be considered on their own merits. other programs, especially those vital to this economy,

should never have been held hostage. i would like to ask that the plans of our time be managed by the ranking member on the trade committee, jim mcdermott of washington. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. >> i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from alabama. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> it is evident that our country is in desperate -- desperate need of jobs. i rise today to bring light to the issue that could cost hundreds of jobs in america. there is a flaw in the g.s.p. and if it is not addressed, it will cause a loss of 150 jobs in the district i represent alone and could cause the loss of many jobs across the industry. mr. aderholt: g.s.p. was designed to exclude

industry-sensitive item, therefore left out textiles. however, in the early 1990's, sleeping bags and other items were added to g.s.p. as eligible for duty-free imports which caused sleeping bags to be the only textile not charged a tax. sleeping bags are simply fabric, cotton and zippers. without the modest import duty, there will be at least another 150 people who will lose their jobs unnecessarily in a region where unemployment is already over 15%. while the economy added no new jobs in august and u.s. unemployment numbers remain stagnant, this issue gives us another example of government policy that hinders job growth

and retention. i want to thank the ways and means committee for their time on this, for their attention, their concern, regarding this matter, and for working with us as we move forward on this process to find a resolution. i'm looking forward to continuing our work with them in pursuit of a fair and common sense solution and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. mcdermott: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 2832, a bill which extends the general system of preferences or g.s.p., for 22 months. let's make it clear what's going on here tonight. usually members of congress come from all over the country on the first day of session and we come back here and rename post offices. so the president said, why don't i go over there on wednesday and give a speech about jobs and about the agenda that this country ought to face. sent a pro forma request to the leadership of the house and

they said, we have important business, we can't make room for you. the first time in history the president has been denied access to a general speech to the entire congress. then you have the problem, what important stuff have you got? so they come looking for a bill. so this is the bill they brought forward. it's going to pass on unanimous consent, it could have passed months ago, it should have passed months ago, because it is a cornerstone of our u.s. trade and development policy and it's been in place since 1976. the g.s.p. program allows duty-free entry into the united states for lots of prubblingts coming from 129 developing countries including some of the poorest in the world. but the poor countries are not the only ones that rely on this. as you just heard, american businesses relie on g.s.p. to be competitive. in fact, most g.s.p. products are import products for u.s. manufacturers. unfortunately, g.s.p. was

allowed to lapse in december in the midst of all the anti-program, anything that the white house or anybody wanted around here, they said no. this was no. this was the congress of no. and so it undermined the development goals of g.s.p. now this job-kill degree lay didn't have to happen. but like so much else, the republicans wanted to use g.s.p. as a hostage. no matter what the cost to u.s. businesses and consumers. despite the damage to our economy by the republicans, i'm supportive of finally passing g.s.p. and now when we're about to get this done, hopefully we can act on the other critical trade programs the republicans have allowed to expire. in particular, i'm talking about trade adjustment assistance program or t.a.a. as it's known around here, which helps workers who are laid off as a result of trade, it retrains workers so they can

compete better in the global environment. t.a.a. has been in place since 1962 and the bunch running this place let it expire last -- early last year. the expansion in 2009 has strong bipartisan support and -- as recently as up to this past december. with good reason, moat members understand or should understand that to compete in the global economy, you need a tpwhrobalry competitive work force. now, the speaker has taken t.a.a. hostage. or the leadership of the republican party, i don't know who is doing it. but they have held it hostage for no good reason whatsoever even though they voted for it in the past, unanimously voted for it in the past, now they can't pass it. the level of dysfunction in this body is astonishing and it's not just intentional delays in extending t.a.a. and other programs, they've refused to act on any of the trade agenda.

and why? because they want action on the three pending f.t.a.'s first, above all else, no matter what. even twhep -- even when the obama administration wanted to move forward with renegotiating the korean f.t.a. last spring, the republicans refused to ask because they wanted action on all three at once. they have criticized the administration. mr. speaker, u.s. businesses are failing, they are falling behind, -- -- they are falling behind their u.e. competitors who have their agreement with korea up and running, making contracts, while we're still sitting here waiting for the leadership of the republican party to let it loose. now the republican delay, republicans killed jobs with their tactics and then they blame the president. now they must have found out something in august when they went home and that's why they're back here worried about

jobsful we'll see about it. we'll see how serious they are. they spent too much time with alice in wonderland where up is down and down is up, it's a cynical game the republicans are playing with the public. we need to act on the two f.t.a.'s that have been fixed, korea and panama, and the programs that have expired, i have submitted a bill that would extend the african growth and opportunity act that would expire next year and add the new country of sudan to our trading partners. these changes need to be made soon to keep the development already occurring from withering and nobody is opposed to the changes. it's just going hostage. we need to put american jobs first and get this work done and we need to do it quickly. we just need to pass this bill that's before us today and i'm sure it will go by unanimous consent. and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves.

the gentleman from michigan is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i think today we will find that we're the congress of yes on this bipartisan legislation and i want to thank the ranking member of the trade subcommittee for his original co-sponsorship and with that i would yield four minutes to the chairman of the trade subcommittee, the distinguished gentleman from texas, mr. brady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized. mr. brady: thank you, mr. chairman. you may not sense it from some of the remarks today but in truth this bill has strong bipartisan support and rise in support of this legislation. renewing the preference program is one valuable step congress can take together to help spur economic and job growth here in america. as last week's job number or more importantly zero jobs number showed us, our economy is struggling. and nearly 14 million americans who want a job can't find one. 22 million americans want a full time job, can't find one. the laps of this preference program has -- the lapse of this

preference program has hurt our manufacturing and -- manufacturers and others. we all know our state's best, in texas, 27 companies have asked congress to renew this preference program, these companies import such products as chemicals, iron and steel and ceramics for uses inputs for their manufacturing operations at home in texas. these imports support jobs in my local communities and make our manufacturers more competitive when they compete against companies overseas. the program benefits every state in this way, not just mine. the lapse of the program since the beginning of the year has cost my texas companies over $21 million in unnecessary duties. that $21 million could have been used to hire more employees or invest in new equipment. instead it was taxed away from them. this legislation would provide a retroactive renewal of the program, give these companies the opportunity to get these duties refunded to them and i

know they can use this money more effectively to promote jobs and invest in our economy than sending it here to washington. mr. speaker, i'm particularly pleased there's strong bipartisan support for this legislation, the leadership of the chairman dave camp along with the ranking member levin and congressman mcdermott, my friend and co-worker on the trade subcommittee, as original co-sponsors of this legislation. and as a result of this strong bipartisan support, i expect it to pass strongly tonight in the house. i hope the other body will move quickly to consider this legislation. last december during the holidays the house passed by voice vote a renewal of this program, it would have prevented the lapse of the program. unfortunately it never made out of the senate. therefore, mr. speaker, i urge not only bipartisan support for this legislation but bicameral support for it as well so we can get this money back in the hands of american manufacturers and job creators.

mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, i yield four minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for four minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you. my good friend from texas is right. there is strong bipartisan support for this legislation. there was bipartisan support for the legislation when it passed in the senate, i mean, excuse me, in the house last december when it expired. but unfortunately the senate shut down, there would not be allowed to move forward by the republicans in the other body and it died. inexplicably. i don't understand the workings of the other body and why republicans would require supermajorities to move things through that will ultimately pass unanimously. there was bipartisan support for

this legislation in january, in february, march, april, may, june. i am proud to support it now and i am pleased that the republican leadership and my friend, chairman camp, brought it forward. but there's just as much support today as there was in january. it made me feel bad that our friend from texas talked about the $21 million that was lost to his texas industries. didn't need to have happened. and any night that we came into session, at the beginning of any week, this legislation could have come forward, since january. this is important and i am pleased we're having the discussion now. i will do anything i can to lobby people in the other body to move forward with it. but it's part of a simple bipartisan agenda where there's

no objection and these are the sorts of things that could come forward. in the 1960's a growing number of nations agreed that more needed to be done to bring the benefits of trade to the developing world and devised a system of trade preferences to meet this objective. the united states enacted it first in 1974 and criteria under this system of preferences were not merely related to trade. but reflected our nation's social values. when we inaugurated this program preferences in 1974 it included a statement of the policies we feel valuable in our trading partners. and about which policies we feel drives the development of nations. it's often referred to as a tool of foreign policy as well as trade. among the criteria we judge our trading partners on is an eligibility for this program,

are the protection of american commercial interests, like the protection of intellectual property, the prevention of seizure of property belonging to united states citizens and businesses. as well as the protection of individual rights such as the protection of commonly accepted labor rights and the elimination of child labor. i wonder at this point if i may ask a question to my friend, the chairman of the committee, if he would yield? mr. camp: if the gentleman would yield i'd be happy to take a question. mr. blumenauer: thank you. yes, i guess i have to yield. you would answer a question, mr. chairman. as i scanned the legislation i don't see any reference in the elements to the protection of the environment. is there anything in this legislation that would speak to that? mr. camp: the short answer is no. the gentleman is correct had in

-- the gentleman is correct in his analysis of the reading of the bill. this is a straightforward extension of the existing program. so it has not added in any additional eligibility criteria in this legislation. this is just simply a straightforward extension. mr. blumenauer: and if the gentleman would entertain an additional question, i appreciate that this is -- has not been incorporated in the past and that this is just a simple extension over the course of the next 22 months. we're going to -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. blumenauer: would the gentleman yield me -- mr. mcdermott: i yield the gentleman an additional minute. mr. blumenauer: as we move forward, hopefully we won't be dealing with the expiration in the future. i'm wondering if the gentleman would entertain working with us as we come forward in the course of a replacement, if we might consider including environmental protections in the list of accepted criteria? mr. camp: i haven't had a chance to review your suggestion but

would be happy to take a look at it. mr. blumenauer: ok. thank you. i appreciate the gentleman's courtesy and interest in at least looking at it. mr. speaker, one of the things that we have done with the trade agenda in 2007 was establish environmental protections which are part of future f.t.a.'s. we've kind of turned the corner with trade agreements and i'm hopeful that this relatively modest and i would thing noncontroversial item could be included so that as we move forward in the future we add to our list and would benefit developing countries' respect for the environment. trade can have a powerful affect on environmental protection, we've worked hard to incur them in previous items and i'm hopeful that we can work together to make sure when this comes before us again the environment is given its due

protection. i appreciate and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: mr. speaker, i'm prepared to close at this point. if the gentleman has no further speakers. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, i have no other speakers so i will close on our side. i expect this bill will pass in five minutes. without a vote against it. this bill could be law by tomorrow at noon if the senate would act and i hope that my colleagues on the other side will do as we will do on this side, contact our colleagues in the senate and ask them this time, put it up and move it. now, if they don't all you can say is this was a trial balloon we put up in the air and we found out the senate was asleep or dysfunctional or i don't know what would you put on it, they have to act on this if they're

serious about a trade agenda for this country. and i hope that we can make it happen for the american worker. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: thank you. i yield myself such time as i may consume and i want to thank both of my colleagues for their commitment to work with the other body, to ensure that this legislation becomes law as we all know, we can use all the help we can get when we get to the other side of the capitol but i want to re-emphasize that this is part of a four-year history of more competition for u.s. manufacturers and u.s. companies. this is bipartisan legislation which has been around for a long time and it is important to continue to grow markets and create exports and this legislation helps american employers, american manufacturers and their employees, more importantly, by creating an and supporting jobs here in america -- creating and

sporting -- supporting jobs here in america. it is just an important, valuable part of our export policy and i urge, mr. speaker, all of my colleagues to join in supporting this bipartisan legislation. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. mr. camp: mr. speaker, i also ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 2832. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2832. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess unt

>> we spent the most time on disaster relief, fema. this summer, almost 200 people were killed in joplin, missouri, when a tornado struck that community. we have had a serious hurricane here on the east coast. irene, we know the damage that it did because of the winds. and senators talked about what happened in vermont. it's hard to explain what happened there. maybe as many as 200 bridges are gone in vermont. hundreds and hundreds of people are out of their homes, the largest office building in vermont is under water, 1,700

people are unable to work. we just had -- that's what this rain is about out here, this is tropical storm lee that has dropped as much as 20 inches of rain. as we speak, in texas, we have 150 fires burning. 1,500 homes have been destroyed in texas because of these fires. washington monument is closed because of an earthquake. all this disaster has caused americans to suffer. the reasons for these storms may be the subject of another discussion, but they are coming fast and furious. i don't see how we, this great nation we have, can stand on the sidelines while our people are suffering. we should give relief to people

when they need it. in joplin, missouri, fema is basically broke and the money has now been shifted to irene and lee. emergencies are happening as we speak. they have withdrawn the long-term help joplin, missouri is planning on, rebuilding schools and communities. so they have stepped out of there. we need to get this relief funding to the american people as quickly as we can and we are going to do that. i'm going to bring a free-standing bill and have a chance to vote on. some of my republican colleagues are trying to -- i was going to say something that was vulgar and i'm not going to do that -- of trying to cater to the tea party by holding up relief efforts. for example, representative

cantor suggested we should hold up disaster relief to meet the tea party's demands. fortunately, all republicans don't agree and i bet most of them don't. governor christie stepped forward and said that's not the right way to go and the governor of virginia said that's not the right way to go. keep in mind as we are having this little precedent, we have thousands of troops in iraq. tens of thousands of troops in afghanistan. none of that is paid for. none of that is paid for. all these tax cuts have been initiated, are now in effect, not paid for. does that mean americans who are suffering we are going to say we can't pay for this.

we can fight the wars in afghanistan, but as senator sanders said a trailer park that was ruined, 170 people in that trailer park, 85-year-old couple have no place to live. winter's approaching. i hope my republican colleagues will put politics aside and work with us to get relief to the american people who need it now. questions. >> would you outline a little bit more -- >> just horn in. >> you asked for questions. could you outline a bit more what you expect to be in the fema disaster supplemental. >> it will be $6 billion. second question.

>> what do you plan to do with -- what -- when the white house send those up and t.a.a.? >> i will meet this evening with chief of staff daly and rob neighbors, the person who works on things on the white house and we have a way forward. my concern is trade adjustment assistance and we are going to get trade adjustment assistance done before we do the trade bills, otherwise we don't do the trade bills. [inaudible question] >> yes, i'm going to send that back to them. that's all that will be in there is trade adjustment. [inaudible question] >> unless it passes the house, we aren't going to take up any of the trade bills.

[inaudible question] >> the speaker has said he will get this done, but i think we have to make sure that something doesn't go awry, so i have to make sure that the trade adjustment assistance passes before we do the trade bills. >> regarding the supplemental disaster relief, the $6 billion in the homeland security bill -- [inaudible] >> some of the issues are so bad. on the mississippi river, we have three million acres of farm land,, three million acres covered with water. >> have you talked to president obama about the jobs proposal he is going to make and do you expect to have votes in the near term? >> i talked to him frankly in

general. so i have an idea of what he is going to do. i haven't helped write the speech and haven't seen it. if there is a legislative package, we can have a vote on that or take it in pieces. >> do you feel -- could you comment on what you want to hear from the president on thursday night and the $300 million package is that robust enough to do the job, kickstart the economy and help? >> i told the president when i talked to him yesterday that i thought his speech in michigan -- i watched parts of it, and i think it was tremendous and i hope he keeps that new pattern of speaking and said we are in a new day here and i hope that's the case. i have to see what the $300 billion consists of. if it's only the extension of the tax holiday, i'm not sure

that's enough. one last question. >> when are you going to discuss with mr. daly? >> trade. [inaudible question] >> what percentage of that package should be higher taxes? >> it was difficult for me to do. as everyone knows here, it was my idea of the supercommittee, but everyone else was outdoing whatever they do on a break and i was making scores of phone calls talking to senators, democratic senators, about this supercommittee. so the first week or so of that, i'm not sure it was a good idea to do the supercommittee. but i have done it and i'm happy with the people i was able to put on that committee. and i'm pleased with my conversation with all the other leaders. as senator mcconnell said to me

today, he was a little disappointed. he told me in my comments. he said i saw your comments about the supercommittee and you said there was 50-50 chance. no. i said better than 50-50 chance. he said that isn't good enough. failure isn't an option. i feel good about the leaders talking about the importance of this committee to avoid sequestration and do big things that the country needs but i'm not going to micro manage what the senators are doing. i'm not going to do that. thanks everybody. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> harry reid mentioned the free trade agreements. the house voted voice passage of the duty free bill and come back for one vote. senate republican leaders spoke

to reporters about the fall aagenda ave -- agenda. >> well, welcome back, everyone. i can tell how excited you are to have us back. we are equally excited to be here. i think what we'll hear tomorrow night is some additional spending items recommended by the president. only i would say with regard to that, if government spending were the answer, we would be in the middle of a boom right now. we have been in a spending free over the last two years and increased our debt. lost 1.7 million job since the last stimulus and we intend to listen plightly to the recommendations that the president has, but i think i can confidently say everybody in the

republican conference says we need to quit borrowing, quit spending, quit threatening to raise taxes and a wet blanket on top of the private sector economy. i think the president's decision last friday to delay the ozone regulation will produce way more jobs than anything he might recommend tomorrow night by way of additional government spending. so we'll listen plightly to what he has to say and take a look at it and we need to go in a different direction, a direction that reassures the private sector. over the last month, i have been all over the country. the single most repeated problem was overregulation. too many new regulations, too many new regulators and all of that has produced the kind of

caution that is keeping the private sector from growing and expanding. with that, see if anybody else would like to -- >> we don't hold the president responsible for problems he inherited, but we do think he ought to be responsible for making the economy worse by throwing as the leader said, a big wet blanket over job creation and we are ready to work with the president in order to make it easier and cheaper for job creators to create private sector jobs. and a good way to start would be for the president to send to congress today the three trade agreements that have been sitting on his desk since inauguration which would create $4 billion in new exports and put farmers and manufacturers to work selling overseas what they make and grow in the united states. >> somebody asked me what i want to hear from the president tomorrow night and i said

something different, something different from what he has been saying. what he has been saying and doing hasn't been working. the president's policies continue to make the economy worse and make it more difficult and more expensive to create jobs. there are two million more unemployed in america today than when he took office. gas prices have doubled. the federal debt has gone up. number of people on food stamps have gone up. that this his president's record and that's why i think the american people want a change of direction and i hope that the president will say something different tomorrow night but from everything we hear, it sounds like more of the same, which is more job-crushing regulations and policies and we have heard it from our constituents and small businesses make it more difficult for our people to get back to work. >> i want to draw the line between the reality of the red tape and regulations coming out

of this administration versus the rhetoric coming out of this administration. and in july and august alone, there have been 1,200 proposed and finalized regulations at a cost of over $17 billion. the white house conveniently forgot that when they said five years they were going to save $10 billion over five years. so the reality is they have added in two months alone, $17 billion in regulations and these regulations continue to be a heavy wet blanket over our economy. >> as i traveled my state in addition to historic 100-year drought and wildfires, i heard people talk about their concern that unemployment remains unseptemberbly high. and how they believe that the short-term fixes that are coming out of fixes are creating more

uncertainty, more debt, more questions about taxes and the future of our tax policy and thus keeping the very people who are sitting on trillions of dollars worth of cash who could create jobs if they were properly incentivized, keeping them on the side lines. rather than quick fixes or get-rich quick schemes, we need kinlt pro-growth policies starting with tax reform. >> the president is supposed -- >> we take you back to the u.s. house. one vote. live coverage here on c-span. and nays were ordered. the clerk will report the title of the concurrent resolution. the speaker pro tempore: house -- the clerk: house concurrent

resolution 67. concurrent resolution authorizing the use of the capitol grounds for the district of columbia special olympics law enforce. torch run. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution? members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 379, the nays are zero. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are success peppeded, the concurrent resolution is

agreed to and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. members, house will be in order. please take your conversations in the back off the floor. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to speak out of order for the purpose of making an announcement. >> mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. members, plea had please. -- members, please. thank you, gentlemen. the gentleman from michigan. please. >> i wish to announce to all members of the house that the permanent select committee on

intelligence has ordered the bill h.r. 1892, the intelligence authorization act for fiscal year 2012, reported favorably to the house with an amendment and last week filed its report on the bill in the house. the bill is currently expected to be considered in the house this coming friday. mr. speaker, the classified schedule of authorizations and the classified annex accompanying the bill are available for review by members at the offices of the permanent select committee on intelligence in room hvc-304 at the capitol visitor's center. mr. rogers: it will be open during regular visit hours for the convenience of any member who wishes to review this material prior to the consideration by the house. i recommend that members wishing to review the classified annex contact the committee's director of security to arrange a time and daylight for that viewing -- date for that viewing. this assure the availability of committee staff to assist members who desire assistance during their review of these classified materials.

i urge interested members to review these materials in order to better understand the committee's recommendations. the classified annex to the committee's report contains the committee's recommendations on the intelligence budget for fiscal year 2012 and related classified information that cannot be disclosed publicly. it is important that members keep in mind the requirements of clause 13 of house rule 23 which only permits access to classified information by those members of the house who have signed the oath provided in a that rule. if a member has not yet signed the oath but wishes to review the classified annex and classified authorization -- >> mr. speaker, the house is not in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. members, please take your conversations off the floor. the gentleman may proceed. mr. rogers: if the member has not yet signed that oath but wishes to review the classified annex and schedule of authorizations, the committee staff can administer the oath and see to it that the executed form is sent to the clerk's office.

in addition the committee rules require that members agree in writing to a nondisclosure agreement. the committee agreement indicates the member has been granted access to the classified annex and that they are familiar with the rules of the house and the committee with respect to the classified nature of that information and the limitations on disclosure of said information. i want to thank the speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's statement will appear in the record. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. i send to the desk a privileged report from the committee on rules for filing under the rule. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title. the clerk: trorp accompany house resolution -- report to accompany house resolution 392, resolution for providing consideration of the bill, h.r. 2218, to amend the charter school program under the elementary and secondary education act of 1965, and providing for consideration of the bill, h.r. 1892, to authorize appropriations for

fiscal year 2012 for intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the united states government, the community management account and the central intelligence agency retirement and disabilities system and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. members, please, if we can take our conversations in the back or off the floor. the house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? mr. kucinich: mr. speaker, i rise to a point of privilege. the speaker pro tempore: at chair has been made aware of a valid basis for the gentleman's point of personal privilege. the gentleman from ohio is recognized for one hour. mr. kucinich: thank you very much, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the house continues not to be in order. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order.

the house will be in order. the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: thank you very much, mr. speaker. and good evening. tonight i wish to speak to this congress and to my fellow americans about international policy and its relationship to the domestic economy. i will advocate a new direction america must take in the world so that we can meet the needs of our people here at home. for the past decade we have relied on the force of our arms to make america more secure while our economy has rotted from within. america has lost its focus, america has spent more time concentrating on reshaping the world than on reshaping our economy. we have created hundreds of thousands of jobs for military contractors all over the world where we have just learned that we created zero jobs here in the united states in the month of august as unemployment continues to stay above 9%.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman will suspend. the house will be in order. once again, let's ask members to take their conversations off the floor. the house will be in order. the gentleman from ohio. mr. kucinich: -- mr. kucinich: as i said, mr. speaker, we have created hundreds of thousands of jobs for military contractors all over the world while we just learned that we created zero jobs here in america in the month of august. as unemployment continues to stay above 9%. come home, america. we must begin to focus on things here at home and stop roaming the world looking for dragons to sleigh. we have an obligation to defend our nation, but that includes working for peace abroad and seeking peaceful resolution of conflict, a capacity that, at our peril, we have not fully developed. i call it strength for peace. it involves the pursuit of what

president franklin roosevelt called the science of human relations, actually engaging those with whom we disagree most to attempt to find a way to could he exist peacefully. as -- co-exist peacefully. as dr. martin luther king said in a commencement address in 1965, and i quote, we must find some alternative to war and bloodshed. i do not wish to minimize the complexity of the problems to be faced in achieving disarmament and peace, but we shall not have the courage, the insight to deal with some matters unless we're prepared to undergo a mental and spiritual change. it is not enough to say we must not wage war. we must love peace and sacrifice for it. we must fix our visions not merely on the negative expulsion of war but on the positive affirmation of peace. we must sea south korea that peace represents -- we must see that peace represents a sweeter

music, far superior to the discords of war. i believe the american people have the capacity, mr. speaker, to undergo a mental and spiritual change that dr. king spoke about. people are about that work in their own private lives every day. the question is, does our government and those who lead it have that capacity? are we willing to look, recognize that the path we're on leads only to destruction and poverty? and are we willing to embark courageously on a new path? to those who say that this is naive, i ask, has the strategy of military intervention, which took us and keeps us in iraq, afghanistan and libya, made us any safer? the muscle-bound with us or against us mindset which passes for a state craft has placed us on a march of folly, that in the

past decade has left america with thousands of dead young soldiers, over a million dead innocents in iraq, afghanistan, pakistan and the voubding region, a new generation -- surrounding region, a new generation of terrorists and trms upon trillions of dollars of debt. as poverty and war are twins, so are peace and prosperity. mindful of the disaster of spreading war and being an eyewitness as to how easily our country seems to be drawn into conflict i traveled to syria this year to personally urge their leader to stop the violence, respect human rights and begin a transition toward as democratic state. i traveled to lebanon afterwards to hear the concerns of leaders who also believe that the violence in syria must stop and who are concerned that if radical fundamentalism results in the overthrow of the

government of syria the same fires will consume their own nation which developed a fragile political and social consensus after years of civil war. i opposed the war in libya, not because it was unconstitution -- not only because it was unconstitutional but it was and is unconscionable for america to take sides in a civil war, spending perhaps billions in an ongoing war where we have so many pressing needs here at home. we went in because we were told a massacre could occur. yet civilian casualties in libya mounted after the u.s. and nato attacked. in order to please the west libya cooperated with the c.i.a. , got rid of its w.m.d. program in 2004 and privatized its economy, resulting in massive

unemployment. it was moving through to reform even as the west moved to bomb it and inexplicably the west moved to take up the cause of elements of al qaeda's -- al qaeda spurring the rebels. we learned today from cnn that the rebels and fighters aligned with them are looting weapons warehouses across libya where as many as 20,000 surface to aramisles had previously been kept under lock and key. western officials -- officials, perhaps the same geniuses who knowingly helped rebel elements with ties to al qaeda overthrow the libya government, are now worried that the surface to aramisles and other weapons will get into the wrong -- surface to aramisles will get into the -- air missiles will get into the

wrong hands. this attempt to use force to bring others to sub jux in the name of democracy -- sucks in the name of democrats -- sub jecks of democracy has become a device for the squandering of our own wealth and the spreading of poverty here at home. did our government just wake up one day and discover that 14 million americans are out of work? and that we need a massive program to put them back to work? no. it's known that for some time. war has become our great distraction. it has given those who have little or no ability to construct a fair economy an opportunity to pretend leadership at the expense of those brave men and women who serve. and at the expense of the american economy and expense of the american taxpayers. we can no longer afford

participating in this war game of nations. i opposed the war in afghanistan and it brought congress to confront it several times because the u.s. has spent $1 -- 1/2 trillion dollars trying to democraticize a tribal nation, we're failing to spend sufficient resources to protect our democracy here at home. the latest report is that we may be in afghanistan through 2024, at the request of the afghanistan government. this will cost us hundreds of billions, perhaps even trillions more. doesn't it make more sense for our troops to come home at the request of, for the benefit of, our people? i led opposition in this congress to the war in iraq. nine years ago, i warned this

congress that there was no reason to go to war against iraq. i was asked at the time, whose side are you own, america's or the murderous dictator saddam hussein's? opposing that intervention was seen by some as coddling a murderous dictator. no matter that hussein had opposed al qaeda, no matter there was a no proof that iraq had anything to do with 9/11 or al qaeda's role in 9/11. no matter that iraq did not have the intention or capability of attacking the united states and no one had been able to show that iraq had weapons of mass destruction. i wasn't for saddam hussein. i was for the truth. and for peace. america pursued war anyway. america put the lives of its

sons and daughters on the line. america will spend over $3 trillion for this war that was based on lies. and even today, we find our government will not bring the troops home as promised but instead will continue to spend billions on this stupid and corrupt war in iraq while our own nation is falling apart. money for war, but no money for jobs. now am i advocating isolationism? certainly not. we need to strengthen the united nations peacekeeping ability and blunt nato's war making capability. we must stop nato from going rogue. we need a counterterrorism strategy which brings people to justice, not which dispenses -- dispenses justice from 10,000 feet p with predator drones.

s the predatory interventionism we must stop. we must stop intervening for oil companies or other corrupt interests. we cannot be the policemen of the world and lay off police and firemen in our own nation. we cannot continue to bomb bridges in other countries and say that we do not have the money to build bridges in america. we must stop pretending that america can solve all the problems in the world when we can't solve our own problems here at home. how can we bring democracy to other nations when we are losing it here at home? we cannot tell other people how to live, when we have people here at home having trouble or difficulty living. we should look to the wisdom of the book of proverbs where it is written, and i quote, he who troubles his own house, shall

inherit the wind. he who troubles his own house shall inherit the wind. and we must work to set our own house in order. mr. speaker, there were no weapons of mass destruction in iraq. but there are weapons of mass destruction here in america. unemployment is a weapons of mass destruction. -- is a weapon of mass destruction. poverty is a weapon of mass destruction. homelessness is a weapon of mass destruction. inadequate education, a weapon of mas destruction. lost -- of mass destruction. lost pension benefits, weapons of mass destruction. poor health care is a weapon of mass destruction. yet despite the obvious needs

domestically, the pentagon budget now consumes over 50% of our discretionary spending and the pentagon budget has grown alongside the war budget. just this war, the wars and pentagon budget will consume close to $1 trillion of taxpayer money. $1 trillion. do you have any idea how many jobs $1 trillion can create? stop the wars. trim the bloated pentagon budget. use the savings to put america back to work. the american people want work, not warfare. can we see any clear eexample of endless war we are supposed to be impressed with leaders who for the sake of america yield weapons of awesome size against small countries. yet they lack the strength to confront wall street, which is

destroying jobs on main street. they bailed out banks for $700 billion, refusing, refusing to link the bailout to mortgage modification. which would help millions of americas stay in their homes. the fed, which infamously looked the other way as the financial crisis was building and failed to properly monitor the over exposure of top banks, created $1.2 trillion out of nothing and gave secret emergency loans to some of the largest banks who helped cause the financial collapse through reckless investments. this secret money created out of nothing but backed by the full faith and credit of the u.s. is going to fuel an international financial system which siphons wealth out of the u.s., avoids paying tacks, takes american jobs and moves them to low wage cly mats.

according to bloomberg news, the $1.2 trillion peak on september 5, 2008, was almost three times the size of the federal budget deficit that year and approximates the amount of money, $1.27 trillion, that is due on unpaid principal on 6.5 million homes that are in or facing foreclosure. secret loans went to marleau began stanley for $107 billion. citigroup, $99.5 billion. bank of america, $91.4 billion. goldman sachs, $69 billion and to foreign borrowers, including bank of scotland, $4.5 billion. how is it that banks too big to fail still exist? we know they'll fail again.

the taxpayers will be asked to bail them out again. to preserve the wealth of shareholders, bondholders and executives again. the destruction of the middle class has been accelerated by the wall street manipulators brought about the collapse of the housing market, destroyed trillions of wealth built into american homes. risk, like taxes is a yolk unfairly placed upon the shoulders of the middle class -- is a yoke unfairly placed upon the shoulds of the middle class. wealth is being redistributed upwards at a pace not seen since the 1920's, the purchasing power of the middle class is lower than in decades. a third of all americans owe more than their home is worth. how is it possible that 120 million americans literally have no wealth, just debts? how is it possible that 150 million americans have less

wealth than the top 400 individuals. how did it come to pass that the top 13,400 households, according to david k. johnson, have more yearly income than the bottom 96 million americans? who created this economy where welfare for the wealthy creates a system where a person earning $4 billion a year, managing a hedge fund, pays a lower tax rate on most of his income than a person who drives a truck? in a report just released, the pew charitable trust wrote, and i quote, the idea that children will grow up to be better off than their parents is a central component of the american dream and sustained american optimism. however, a middle class upbringing does not guarantee the same status over the course of a lifetime. a third of americans raised in the middle class fall out of the middle as adults, unquote. the implications of the pew

charitable trust report are chilling. america's middle class is being destroyed. america is headed toward a two-class society. just as america could not survive half free and half slave, so america cannot survive half rich and half poor. what happens to a dream deferred? wrote langston hughes. does it dry up like a raisin in the sun, or fester like a sore and run? does it stink like rotten meat or crust and sugar over like a heavy sweet. maybe it sags like a heavy load. or does it explode? it is democracy itself at risk here. an economic democracy is a precondition of a political

democracy. with endless wars, without solid jobs to sustain a middle class, a new national security state armed with the patriot act will exist primarily to provide surveillance of a growing, bristling poverty class. america knew this 40 years ago. 44 years ago. when on february 29, 1968, the report of the national advisory commission on civil disorders, also known as the kerner report, pronounced, and i quote, america is moving toward two societies, one black, one white, separate and unequal. unquote. then the equalities were in lack of access opportunities for jobs, housing, education, and social services. in 1998, 30 years after that

report, senator fred harris said, quote, there is more poverty in america, it is deeper, blacker, and browner than before an it is more concentrated in the cities which have become america's poor houses. unquote. the inequalities exist today. just since january of 2009, unemployment has skyrocketed among african-americans from 12.7% to 16.7%. among hispanics, the unemployment rate is currently 11.3%. while intensifying amopping people of color, poverty today is color blind. foreclosures have spread through all american neighborhoods as a wild fire, consuming with it the hopes and dreams of millions. we had a moral urgency to address unemployment in the inner cities but we failed as a society on that. we have learned that writ large in the fate of people who live

in our cities has been the fate of those who live in the suburbs. because the same massive economic ma seenry that for generations was crushing the hopes of millions of inner city americans, bank who disinvested, insurance companies who redlined, businesses who pulled out this same plague is rehave ited throughout america. the official unemployment figure of 9.1% conceals a much larger, more devastating picture in america. according to a recent study by youngstown state university, the de facto unemployment rate as conceived and computed by their center for working class studies is 26.37%. this figure includes individuals who are no longer looking for work, discouraged, underemployed and those who are marginally employed. corporations, maynewhile, are sitting on trillions of dollars

and not hiring because of uncertainty, insinuating that small changes in federal regulations or tax policy are killing jobs. yet we know that massive changes in federal tax policy and government regulations have taken place at periods of great economic growth in the united states. our economy has not hit a rough spot on the road, it has hit a wall. the greatest losers in today's economic system are the young. they've been fleeced. they were promised good jobs with good pay if they got a good education. millions. -- millions have done that. only to discover that the jobs that were promised were not there. millions of young people have moved in with their family and friends, barely scraping by, dreading the student loans they have to are pay, -- to repay,

dreading when those come due. the major fault of our economy is the failure to produce good-paying jobs for all americans. the reason for high unemployment and low-paying jobs are many but two major reasons stand out. lack of consumer demand and stagnant wages accompanying low union participation. there is a lack of consumer demand in an economy that is 70% dependent on consumer spending. there are those who say we can spur demand with more tax cuts for businesses. this fails the test of experience. business re-- businesses receive tax cut, we still have high unemployment. business profits greater than ever. investment less. we have learned from the past few years that businesses will not invest while the economy is in bad shape. since world world ii, americans come out of every recession in less than a year this time we had a false recovery. the economic numbers improved

briefly while stimulus was unjected. today we're back in rae session that is destroying people's lives and setting back our nation. we did not have enough stimulus to begin with. as the stimulus runs out, things are getting worse. the recession is feeding on itself. in 1937 a second round of depression surfaced as stimulus was withdrawn. requiring another effort by the government to stabilize the economy. the parallel between 1937 and 2011 is obvious. we need a second stimulus. and it has to be strong enough to put millions of americans back to work. state and local governments are forced to lay off people by the hundreds of thousands. these layoffs are not introducing efficiency, they undermine service, they reduce the necessary role of government in the life of a community. massive aid is needed to all areas of government, not because

government spent recklessly but because revenues are down, income tax revenue is down, sales tax revenue is down. property tax revenue is down. due to foreclosures. we can stimly the -- stimulate the economy by providing revenue to rehire state and local government employees. this is the easiest way to put hundreds of thousands back to work. this is an obvious way to stimulate the economy on a significant scale. state, local government, public schools, public and private colleges would all have an enhanced ability to restore service. such a stimulus would create an economic climate where businesses will expand their investment, utilizing their own profit. the same thing is true in the housing area. the government must immediately implement a new housing program. more and more properties are becoming vacant and vandalized while people are doubling up.

we need a full scale program where economically troubled homeowners are given the right to rent at market rate, property and foreclosure. the government would provide a rent subsidy while the homeowners seek work. after all, the american people want work, not welfare. there should be work for those who are able to work. government must become the employer of last resort. the private sector is not providing the jobs. when the private sector fails to provide the jobs the government has a moral responsibility and a practical responsibility to step forward to put the country back to work. as with f.d.r. and the new deal the government must now put millions of americans back to work rebuilding our infrastructure. the american society of civil engineers issued a report that there are 2.-- $2.2 trillion in infrastructure rebuilding that must take place to move the commerce of america.

it's not enough to describe the situation and make a few suggestions as to what could be done to take us in gnaw direction. -- us in a new direction but there comes a time when we need to look at some dramatic change that needs to be done, to restructure our economy. this month i'm going to be introducing a bill which will be aimed at addressing our structural economic problems directly. it is called the national employment economic defense act, the need act. america needs millions of jobs. how can we create millions of jobs? in a time of annual deficits, long-term debt and contracting budgets. here's how. the federal reserve creates money out of nothing. as we all know, it's given it to the banks. the fed assumed that power through an act of congress. federal reserve has used all of its standard monetary policy

tools. but the american economy is not getting any better. whatever the fed is doing, it is not working. the reason why is perhaps best explained by the fed itself. quote, the fed can't control inflation or influence output and employment. unquote. the fed has been buying treasury and other securities to put downward pressure on interest rates. the idea is to lower finance costs, encourage more borrowing and nudge investors into riskier investments. this provides breathing space but little else. consumers are already over their heads in debt, they aren't going to borrow more. neither will producers who's sales are slack. high default rates are widening spreads. many investers will still prefer to make a small gain on government securities rather than risk taking losses. reality beats theory. the reality is that not enough people have enough money. why is this?

where's the money come from? why isn't it coming? the fed dnt create money we use in our bank account, the bappings do. most of this money is created when banks make loans. this is why the fed can't control inflation or influence output and employment. output and employment depend on demand. demand depends on how much money people have or can borrow. because banks create this money, they control demand. if banks aren't lending or borrowers aren't borrowing, new money isn't being created to replace the money removed when bank loans are paid. so the money supply shrinks. the fed can only put more money into the economy by buying assets from nonbanks. no money goes into the economy when the fed buys their assets. it's just a swap of one asset for another called reserves. banks can't lend reserves into

the economy. the nonbank sellers of assets are mainly large institutional investors, they don't spend much of the money they receive, they invest it in other assets. that's their business. but this stirring of he is assets nupet strat fear doesn't trickle down to the earth. the real families, shops, businesses ofed road and schools, real economies bypass we we know this. the money is not getting to where it's need and until it does, things can only get worse. none of the current poims work because of the way the current -- poims work because of the way the current system is set up. we have to reclaim our constitutional power to issue money into the economy, unburdened bidet. last congress -- by debt. last congress i introduced legislation to do just that and i will be reintroduced it next week. here's what that legislation does. first, it ends the fed's unaccountability by putting it

under treasury. second, it ends reserve banking, ending the banks' ability to control demand in our economy. and third, it empowers our nation to issue money directly into the economy to create jobs to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, unhindered bidet and interest payments. creating millions of new, good paying jobs. it gets the money to where it's needed the most. it gets the economy going and keeps it goes. it avoids debt and deficits. it primes the pump of the economy. it enables us to regain control of our destiny as a nation. this plan would not createn flation because it would reduce infrastructure costs. lower costs means that prices can go down. lower prices do not define inflation, real wealth will be created with new money. infrastructure is enduring wealth, unlike the financial wealth of the stock market.

if government borrows money created by banks for infrastructure it's an interest debt paid for over time but if government creates the money for infrastructure, spends it into circulation, there's no debt or interest cost. the same amount of money is created in either case, adding to the money supply by exactly the same amount. this is also a way to say the free enterprise system from self-destruction. the american people know what's going on in our economy. it's run by wall street for wall street. it's run by banks for banks. unless we take a look at serious structural reforms, we are headed for a two-class society. the ability to coin or create money is an inherent power under article 1, section 8 of the united states constitution.

the need act would enable government to envest in america -- invest in america. this coming sunday we will observe the 10th anniversary of a terrible blow to our nation's sense of security and confidence. we will never forget september 11, 2001. but we also need to remember the enduring capacity of our nation to bounce back from tragedy. we need to remember what this country is made of. america is made of vision and courage. the courage and vision of washington, jefferson and adams to put lives, for tubes -- fortunes, sacred honor on the line for the purpose of freedom and independence. we are the country of f.d.r. and nut deal. of john f. kennedy and the new

frontier. of l.b.j. and the great society. we are a nation of cars matic leaders like ronald reagan and bill clinton who inspired a sense of optimism and confidence in america. we need to remember who we are. and perhaps in that act of remembering we'll regain our confidence. we'll regain our economic strength, we'll regain our ability to put people back to work, we'll help millions save their homes, we'll protect the retirement security of the elderly. we'll ensure that our children will be able to obtain a college education and a job when they graduate. we'll restore our public institutions and the services they provide. we can do all of this and more but we must ask that those who operate the engines of finance abandon their recklessness, their selfishness and pledge allegiance to our nation and its people.

we must demand that corporations pay a fair share of the tax, we must end the offshoring of jobs and profits. some of our leaders with trembling hands and nervous eyes have focused abroad, our country is falling apart from within. america was never meant for decline. america was always meant for an upward, uplift path. we must now correct our course. we must move away from trying to determine the fate of nations around the globe and focus on the fate of the one nation that must matter to us more than all others, the united states of

america. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal request. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. tim beneficiary of new york for today, -- bishop of new york for today, mr. reyes of texas for today and the balance of the week, mr. honda of california for today and for the balance of the week, mr. danny davis of illinois for today, mr. lucas of oklahoma for today and mr. lungren of california for today and the balance of the week. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the gentleman from texas is

recognized for -- if the gentleman will suspend. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from north carolina rise? ms. foxx: permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. today i want to congratulate the wilkes county 11-12-year-old girl's softball team for their amazing and record-breaking season this year. they won 15 games in a row and became the first team from north carolina to reach the world series. although they did not take the world series title, their third place finish and their victories over opponents from around the country and around the world on their journey to the semifinals prove that this is a remarkable team. their teamwork, sportsmanship and character served to raly the entire wilkes county community around them and saw them through their historic run for the world

championship of little league softball. i want to congratulate the whole team, the coaches and the dedicated parents who helped make this season one for the record books. the wilkes girls all-stars have inspired many and made their county proud. i hope to see them win their way back to the world series again next year. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 11, 2011, the gentleman from texas, mr. carter, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. carter: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank you, mr. speaker. we've all been back in our districts for the last month. we've been talking to our friends and neighbors back home about what america is truly concerned with, what we are most -- what is most important in the eyes of all americans

that is getting america back to work. our economy is stagnant. this administration is putting up barriers, which is freezing assets because our -- the folks that normally would invest in growth and hiring people are frightened about what's around the next corner and they're sitting on their money and not growing. i met this morning with around, somewhere between 12 and 14 of my neighbors in just a sit down cup of coffee, where we sat around and we talked about the way that folks in central texas view what's going on with the jobs market. in texas, we have been blessed. we haven't faced the kinds of unemployment numbers that other states have had. but we are certainly seeing unemployment creeping up in our state also.

and we talked -- we had small business men and women there and they talked about the things that concern them, we've had meetings with bankers who explained to us that you can look at their deposits and see that american local investors are sitting on the sidelines and keeping their deposits in the bank an not investing in growth, not investing in capital structure, not building buildings, certainly not hiring people so part of the discussion this morning from some very intelligent small business folks was, we think we know why. why do you say this is happening? and i was -- the answers i got were answers that we hear on the floor of this house every day. but the one i've been talking about now for almost a year, maybe even over a year, is the fact that we are seeing the

administration doing through government regulations, which are basically laws passed by the regulators which change the playing field for people in our economy across the board at every level, it's not done by acts of this congress. it's done by acts of bureaucrats in the obama administration as they make rules and regulations that fit their view of the world and how they think the world should work. these regulations regulate the drivers, the force builders of that -- that employ the american people. and many of these regulations have become such a shock to the conscience of people who are in business that they say, my lord, i'm not about to get invested in growth until i know whether i'm going to have a business once the regulators are through with me. and then sitting on the sideline is the giant regulator program which is the health

care bill that we passed last year, this house passed last year, the senate passed, we called it obamacare. it's 2,000 pages, multiplying very rapidly as the regulator, people who are able to pass rules to set up the regulations that govern that bill, are imposing more and more burden on the individual employer and on those people seeking health care. so what i heard today from some people who are presidents of small businesses, run small businesses, thomas barrett, a very intelligent lawyer who advises, is both a financial advisor and a lawyer for small and other size businesses all over central texas, highly sought after for his opinion. they said it's the unknown that's driving investment off the page in the united states. it's the unknown.

we don't know what's going to happen next. what are taxes going to do? we've got taxes that will last for a while and then go back to a different tax. automatically. unless this house acts. then most importantly what we talked mostly about today, was all the new regulations coming up. in the next three or four months, the republican leadership in this house is going to do everything it can to turn back some of the craziness that's gone in the regulatory world. i brought the members here tonight just a few examples of some of the regulations, many of which we have been talking about all year. we spent a lot of time talking about the cement industry, we talked about a lot of things we're going to talk about tonight but it's a general outline of some corrective measures that this

republican-led house is going to try -- going to pass through this body to just start slowing down and changing the direction of what we think are some ill-conceived regulations. the executive branch, the obama administration. where i want to start off, with this poster right here, which just tells you a small example of what we're talking about. in july of this summer, this is just what we've called the regulatory summer. these are regulations that have been proposed by various agencies. many -- there's plenty of others, the labor department, we could go on and on. in july, 229 proposed regulations went into effect, 379 final regulations and the

cost estimated of those proposals and final regulations, over $9.5 billion to the economy in the month of yull. that meant business, job creators took a hickkey of $9.5 billion in the month of july, 2011. we just finished august. 270 proposed regulations, 370 final regulations over $.2 billion in august. so for this summer, just july and august, the two-month total, $17.7 billion in cost to the people who create jobs. now, is it any wonder that the people who create jobs are sitting on the sideline saying, holy cow. how do i hire somebody, and you know, i think the american

people know why people in business hire somebody. they hire somebody because they think that person will make their business more prosperous. will make it work more efficiently. will make it do the job the business was set up to do. if you are in a roofing business and you put roofs on houses, you hire more roofers because you think you'll be able to produce a better quality product faster and more efficient think, therefore enhancing the profit that those who have invested, their capital and labor into that business. they can make a profit, so that business can thrive. you don't hire roofers when you don't need to put roofs on houses. that doesn't make any sense. everybody with any kind of common sense knows that. now if you've got a person who has some business, whether it be big or small and they literally don't know what the government is going to do to

them tomorrow, or let's just say in the next two months, following this track record, they could be looking at another almost $20 billion worth of additional costs to their business, that could be coming up in september and october. based upon the last two months, it's arguable that it's close to $20 billion of additional costs that they were not anticipating and never thought was going to happen to them and all of a sudden out of the clear blue, it drops in their lap. you'll hear arguments, these things are environmental and people have known all along something was going to be done and that may or may not be true. but what the ramification os what regulators actually did are turning into horrendous costs as businesses are trying to get the gound under them stable so they can start hiring

again. if you're on balancing ground, like the earthquake near washington which i'm fortunate i wasn't in when that ground is unstable uric don't know which way to turn. the same thing goes for business. when the foundation underneath your business is unstable you don't know which way to turn. are you going to go out and hire somebody, give them a job, when this is what your life is right now? and someone is creating that problem? actually by their actions, making it unstable. i would argue that questionable regulations, the imposition of additional costs, the unknown of what taxes are going to do tomorrow, all these things create an unstable environment for the people who hire people. so this last regulatory summary is a perfect example of the earthquake that is shaking the foundation of the small businessman and job creators in america.

the president of the united states promised us, the white house promised to save $10 billion in red tape which, that's one of the kind of slang words for bureaucratic regulations in five years. but the white house has put forward $17.7 billion worth of red tape in two months. that's just -- the message has been lost somewhere. when did what we were promised change into three for one worse situation, we were promised a $5 billion savings for the job creators and in fact, we created a $17.7 billion expense

and uncertainty to the job creators and we wonder why we are not creating jobs. mr. kucinich was talking about his view of the world. he and i don't see the world the same way but the facts are, when he was talking about, we need to create jobs, we darn sure need to create jobs. the world of congress today is finding ways to get this country back to work. if we put this country back to work, 90% of our problems will be much, much better. so the real goal of the republican house this year to finish this year out is going to be trying to correct at least some of this instability created by regulators, these unelected regulators, these are appointed people, not elected people. they are appointed by the president. they are under the wings of the white house, if you will. they are part of the executive branch of government.

and the legislature, this branch, the congress, is going to, in the next several months, try to put some reins on these out of control regulators an hold them back. we've got just some of them, i'm going to talk to you about, some of my colleagues are bringing forward in the future. the week of september 12, which is next week, i suppose, we're going to take up the protecting jobs from government interference act. by tim scott, that's tim, not tom, of south carolina. now the facts of this situation are very unusual in my way of thinking and i think most of the people of the united states when they heard this on television, they said, they can't do that, can they? it seems the boeing corporation has a big operation up in the washington state area and they

were wanting to build an additional plant to build whatever boeing builds whether it's aircraft or whatever it is, they wanted to do it in south carolina. they negotiated and worked in good faith with the citizens of south carolina, the government of south carolina, they have looked at alternative locations around the country to make a determination what is best for their business in their situation today and they determined that they were going to build a very important plant in south carolina. but the national labor relations board, the nlrb, issued a complaint against the boeing company for the alleged transfer of an assembly line from the washington plant to south carolina. yet not one union employee at the boeing's puget