u.s. to work through them. the issue is that the role pakistan will have been shipping them out,. host: as the next step in the peace process? guest: rabani was assassinated and was head of the high peace council. he was not friendly with the taliban and he was just assassinated and that has led hamid karzai to say we need to talk directly to the taliban right now. host: thank you for talking to our viewers about this topic bearingpoint guest: pleasure. host: the house is about to come in for general speeches and they will move to a vote on a continued resolution to keep the government running for six weeks. we want to let you know there is speculation around chris christie and whether or not he will run for presidency. he will make an announcement at 1:00 p.m. today at the new jersey governor's office in side

the state house in trenton. this is a last-minute addition to his schedule. one p m, lark for coverage on c- span2. if you're not near a television then, tune in to c-span.org. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer, for five minutes. mr. blumenauer: thank you, mr. speaker. i note with sorrow the passing the roger kennedy last friday. roger had a long and storied career that exemplified notions of public service. he was, indeed, a renaissance man. it's hard to think of anything that roger had not done in his lifetime with the possible exception of hold elective office. he was director of the national park service, director of the

smithsonian's natural museum of american history, vice president of finance for the ford foundation. he was special assistant to three cabinet secretaries, a lawyer, a journalist, and somehow found time to write 10 books. actually he had run unsuccessfully for congress against fellow minnesotan, gene mccarthy, over 60 years ago. how might history have been different if he had won. you found out about roger's exploits in bits and pieces. when you were engaged in conversation you would reach back into the past to illustrate points with very tangible, concrete, easy to understand examples, often with himself having been in the middle of it. my legislative director and i became acquainted with roger as we were dealing with policies to prevent coke -- cope and recover from natural disasters. one of roger's books was tighted "wildfire and americans, how to save lives, property, and your tax dollars." his kind words mentioned us by

name in the acknowledgement was the high point of both of our careers. he was a valued participant in sessions we would have before and after hurricane katrina. he was a keen student of the built environment, dealing with unintended consequences of policy, whether putting los alamos nuclear laboratory facilities in the middle of an area that had been repeatedly burned by wildfires, or digging into the history of the early south, slavery and land use, the jeffersonian model. he provided information, insights that were unique, profound, and provocative. even after his retirement, he continued to be a scholar, an advocate, a friend, and mentor. especially a mentor. i read the articles that were about roger in the "new york times," "the washington post," but none captured better than a note from our legislative director who wrote, roger was a big thinker.

understanding the way things in the world fit together. i loved just listening to him, it made me feel that at least there were a few people who understand how the world really should be. i always kept my notes of the conversations in hopes they would make me smarter. he was devoted to public service even in retirement. he was always thinking about ways to make the world a better place. he was very focused on the past, writing books about history, but he was a master at using that knowledge to inform himself and others about the future. preventing devastating damage from wildfires with his exploration of the flame zone was a great example. mr. speaker, we often talk about someone's passing as an opportunity to celebrate their life. it's hard to imagine a better life to be celebrated, more productive with greater joy and insight than the life roger kennedy lived. today people in government seem incapable of dealing with big

issues, matters of consequence, -- in a thoughtful and cooperative fashion. there's no better role model for any of us to meet the challenge in all our opportunities and responsibilities than roger kennedy. on behalf of our legislative director, the people in our office who were privileged to know and work with roger, we extend our sympathies to his wife, francis, and roger's circle of family and friends. we are all going forward strengthened by roger's friendship, scholarship, and example. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. jones, for five minutes. mr. jones: mr. speaker, thank you very much. this friday would be the 10th anniversary of our troops being committed to afghanistan. this commitment by the previous administration and congress was justified because bin laden and al qaeda were responsible for 9/11.

but now bin laden is dead, al qaeda is dispersed all around the world. beside me is a poster of an honor guard carrying the flag draped coffin off a plane at dover afters -- air force base to accompany a photo. i will lead into the record an editorial from bob schieffer, titled the real cost of war. i was in an airport lounge the or day when i saw a woman across the way. why i kept staring, i don't know. maybe it's just that she seemed so sad. and then i understood and i looked away hoping she had not seen me stare. because in her lap was an american flag neatly folded into a triangle and placed in a clear plastic case. a flag folded the way it always is when it's given to a soldier's family. as a soldier's coffin is being lowered into the grave. i figured her to be a soldier's

mother and i couldn't help but wonder what memories that flag evoked as she held it there. did it remind her first time she had seen her child in the delivery room? or was it the memory of seeing him go off to school in a first day? or when he brought home the prize from the science fair? or maybe made the touchdown and gave her the first valentine when he wrote out, mommy i love you. i kept thinking about all the talk in washington about the high cost of defense and how we have to cut the pentagon budget before it bankrupts this country. but as i watched that woman, budgets seemed to be such a small part of all of it. no, the real cost of war is not what we pay in dollars and cents, the real cost is what we take from a mother who is left with just a memory and a neatly folded flag in a clear plastic case.

this is over a year ago and i want to thank bob schieffer, i don't think it can be said better than what he said that day and i just read into the record. why this congress continues to complain about budgets and cuts and deficit and debts and our young men and women are walking the roads of afghanistan getting their legs blown off and getting killed. we sit here in congress and don't bring it up as an issue. i want to thank my friends on both sides of the aisle and the republicans on this side of the aisle who are trying to say to mr. obama, no, don't leave them there until 20814. karzai is a crook. he's a corrupt leader. and you're spending $10 billion a month in afghanistan and you can't audit the books in afghanistan. and kids are dying. and yet right here in america we are cutting programs for children to get a pint of milk in schools. and we are saying to a senior citizen, no sandwich at the

senior citizen center because we can't afford it. but, mr. karzai, we are sending you $10 billion. mr. speaker, it's borrowed money. it's not even uncle sam's money. it's probably uncle chiang's money. more important than the money is what bob schieffer said, it's the pain of war. and this congress needs to come together and say to mr. obama, let's bring them home this year, next year, but not wait until 2014, 2015. mr. speaker, i close as i always do an the floor of the house, please, god, bless our men and women in uniform. please, god, bless the families of our men and women in uniform. please, god, in your loving arms hold the families who have given a child dying for freedom in afghanistan and iraq, and ask god to bless the house and senate that we will do what is right in the eyes of god for his people. and ask god to give wisdom, strength, and courage to president obama that he will do what is right in the eyes of

god's people. and i'll say three times, god please, god please, got please continue to bless america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, for five minutes. mr. mcgovern: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcgovern: mr. speaker, i was in colombia at the end of august with a delegation organized by the washington office on latin america. we met the national labor school or e.n.s., to discuss the current labor situation in colombia. their reports on threatened and murdered unionists are nationally recognized and because of this e.n.s. faces constant threats and efforts to discredit them. while not at the levels of early -- early 28000's, violence against colombia's workers continues. it is persistent and frequent. it is a reality that cannot be denied, and it is meant to silence people. at least 40 trade unionists have been murdered since

president santos took office last year. one benchmark in the colombia action plan is for the attorney general's office to meet with e.n.s. and determine howle to address the more than 2,900 cases of murdered unionists of which 90% remain in impunity. the first meeting happened in may. but there's been no second meeting. in bogota, i met with the deputy attorney general, i asked him when the next meeting would happen, and he said imminently. five weeks later, still no meeting. last week human rights watch sent a study to colombia attorney general it says virtually no progress has been made in getting convictions for killings of labor activist that is have occurred in the past 4 1/2 years. so virtually no progress on recent murders of labor activists and little progress on past cases. mr. speaker, i mettle with port workers, workers on plantations, and petroleum and factory workers. their reality is filled with risk, threats, and even death.

they are not valued as human beings,:ian citizens, or productive members of society. in cartagena, port workers went on strike in march. their working conditions are inhumane and forced to work under various subcontracting schemes. these contracts deny them basic benefits and keep them in constant uncertainty about whether they will be working next week or even the next day. they just want the right to negotiate the contracts directly with their employers, the port associations. the port workers ended their strike after a few days because the santos government promised to facilitate talks between the workers and the port associations. but nothing happened. nothing changed. in fact, some things are worse. as part of the l.a.p., the most common subcontracting scheme, the so-called cooperatives, was abolished, except nothing was done to facilitate direct contracting between workers and their employers. so a few scheme has popped up called simply filing joint stock companies, or s.a.s.,

goodbye cooperatives, meet the new boss, worse than the old boss. the government has done little to help, unfortunately. when i asked vice president car zahn about the port workers he promised to meet again with the union leader. mr. speaker, it's not the workers he needs to meet with and convince to negotiate, it's the presidents of the port associations. oil workers showed me photographs and documents describing poor living conditions and working conditions. unfair contracts, and how the canadian, venezuelan oil company acts like a sovereign government on colombian soil, destroying public roads, firing workers for organizing, and calling in security forces to tear gas striking workers. i'm not it's not the whole picture, but once again striking workers returned to work because the government promised to open talks with the company. again all the -- get all the workers are asking for is the right to negotiate directly with the company about their contracts and their living and working conditions.

and once again the colombian government let the workers down. in september the strike was renewed more explosive on all sides than the last one because nothing had changed in july. the u.n. delegate in colombia called on everyone to come to the table and resolve this crisis. describing the conflict as a result of no one creating conditions for dialogue. the workers have again returned to work because of agreements by the government to open talks with the company. this time i hope the government keeps its word. mr. speaker, nothing i saw in colombia indicated things have changed for the better on the ground for colombia's workers. before we take up the f.t.a., we must demand concrete improvements in labor rights and security for colombia's workers. whatever we are doing now isn't working. it isn't making a difference. and it simply isn't enough. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. wolf, for five minutes. mr. wolf: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore:

without objection. mr. wolf: my conscience has compelled me to come to the floor today to voice concerns i have with the influence grover norquist, the president of the american for tax reform, has on the political process in washington. my issue is not with the keeping taxes low. like ronald reagan said and i believe, the problem is not that the people are taxed too little, the problem is the government spends too much. i want to be perfectly clear, i do not support raising taxes on the american people. my concern is with the other individuals in groups and causes with whom mr. norquist is associated that are nothing to do with keeping taxes low. among them, one of mr. norquist's relationship with jack abramoff, essentially laundered money through a.t.r. and mr. norquist knew it. two, his association and representation of of a hamas supporter. he also associated with terrorist financier who pled

guilty in 2006 to conspiring to provide services to palestinian-islamic jihad. three, mr. norquist lobbying on behalf of fannie mae. . fourth, the internet gambling industry. fifth, mr. nor quist's advocate of moving guantanamo bay to the u.s. including khalid sheikh mohammed. i believe mr. nor quist is connected with or profited from a number of unsavory people out of the mainstream. i also believe that mr. norquist has advanced many other issues that many other americans would find inappropriate and when taken as a whole should give people pause. america is in trouble.

unemployment is over 9%. housing values continue to decline. retirement accounts are threatened. the american people are worried. yet, washington is tragically shackled in ideological gridlock. some are dead set of any change to entitlement programs while other insist that any change of tax policy is off the table. we are at a point today that the tsunami of debt in america demands that every piece of the budget be scrutinized and that means more than cutting waste, fraud and abuse and discretionary programs. the real runaway spending is out-of-control entitlement costs and the hundreds of billions in annual earmarks in our tax code. until we reach an agreement that addresses those two drivers of our deficit and debt we cannot write our fiscal ship -- ride our fiscal ship.

i believe mr. norquist is a roadblock in reforming our tax code. when senator tom coburn eliminated an ethanol tax subsidy, who led the opposition? mr. norquist. unlike an earmark included in an annual appropriation bill, tax earmarks are far worse because once enacted they typically exist in perpetuity. have we really reached a point where one person's demand for ideological purity is paralyzing congress to the point that even a discussion of tax reform is due as breaking and no tax pledge? i understand that some may not agree what i say. i understand many are not aware of mr. norquist's association, but my conscious compels me to speak out today. reasonable people can differ on the merits of pledges and i respect those difference. but on the issue is with the

interpreter and the enforcer of the pledge. william wilbur told his colleagues, quote, having heard of all this, you may choose to look the other way but you can never again say you did not know. i urge my colleagues to read my full statement in the record. which will also be posted on my webpage going into greater detail on the issues i have raised. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. woolsey, for five minutes. ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, this week marks an anniversary we must acknowledge but we certainly can't celebrate. this friday we will have spent 10 years at war in afghanistan. we have -- we will have spent a decade fighting a war that the american people no longer

support. the sobering 10th anniversary is a time for reflection. reflection on how our world has changed in the last 10 years. this war has consumed an unjustifiable amount of our national treasure led to an unprecedented burden on our service members and changed forever how an entire generation of young people views the world. this anniversary is the time to reflect on the choices we made and their impact on the world. 10 years later we are still building more machines that have the potential to cause devastating harm to innocent people around the world. 10 years later many of our nation's best and brightest are coming home with scars, both physical and mental, that they and their families will live with forevermore. the numbers are against us. after a decade of war, we still have 90,000 soldiers fighting

in afghanistan. more than 1,800 americans have died. our nation has spent $460 billion on an unwinnable war, and tens of thousands of innocent afghans and iraqis have been killed. it is well past the time for us to end this. in remembering the last 10 years we must think of the future. my five grandchildren are now part of a generation that has grown up without knowing what it's like to live in a country of peace. over the past 10 years we've led our world down a path towards war rather than fighting for peace, rather than fighting for a smarter security plan. the american people and the global community sees the error in our policy and we are facing increasing scrutiny from our international partners. in fact, not one other

government agrees with the u.s.'s use of drones. in fact, our efforts -- our european allies have never supported the u.s. drone strikes in pakistan, yemen and somalia. instead of heeding our calls we're expanding the use of this deadly force, creating automatic drones to cause unchecked devastation. i've spoken from this spot, as you all know, because you heard me so many times, 407 times in support of smart security, an approach for an end for the war. i am not alone. i have been joined by colleagues on both sides of the aisle and supported by americans across the country to call for an end of our war and the return of our troops. that's exactly what my smart security plan is about, making military force a last resort

and instead directing our energy and our resources toward diplomacy, democracy, development aid and the more powerful peaceful ways of engaging with the rest of the world. mr. speaker, i hope all of my colleagues will take note of friday's anniversary and realize that now is the time to turn the tide on our policies in afghanistan. we need to end this war. we need to do it now. we need to promote peace through democracy. we need to promote peace through diplomacy and development. we must bring our troops home. i yield the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from kansas, mr. pompeo, for five minutes. mr. pompeo: great. thank you, mr. speaker. when i first came to congress nine months ago i sadly learned that the federal government of washington, d.c. only grows and grows an grows. when democrats and many republicans do come to the floor of the house and talk

about spending cuts, they're often talking simply about slowing the rate of growth of government. there is seldom, if ever, any real discussion about cutting the size of the federal government or eliminating an entire program or agency. but today we have $14.8 trillion in debt and we can't continue to have any rate of growth. we got to cut it. we got to get rid of some things. as a first step this week i brought a bill that will eliminate the economic development agency. it's part of the department of commerce. was established in 1965 as an element of president johnson's great society. for over 45 years they spent billions on local projects, not national projects, trying to pick monk various projects by industry, region and community. much like a stimulus bill, it provides loans and grants to pet projects of the administration in power. in 2008 they spent $2 million on the harry reid remp and

technology park -- research and technology park at the university of las vegas and last year spent $25 million on the global climate mitigation incentive fund. they will spend almost $300 million of taxpayer dollars. now, this might sound like a lot of money sometimes here in washington, d.c., but in newton, independence, in wichita, kansas, that's still a lot of money. let me talk about the e.d.a. most folks in congress and most folks back in kansas will never have heard of it. i had not before i entered congress. it provides grants and loans to projects across the country. the e.d.a. is nothing more than a giant wealth of redistribution machine. it takes money from one place and one time and resdribts it across the country for inherently local projects. for example, $2 million to the winetasting room and gift shop in washington state. it gave $350,000 to renovate a

theater in colorado. and in 2011 gave $1.4 million to build infrastructure development to a steel plant of $1.6 billion could be built in minnesota. like the vast majority of projects, that steel plant would have been built without federal taxpayer dollars. it was a $1.6 billion project helped by the federal government to the tune of only $1.4 million. though there are even bigger problems with e.d.a. it's duplicative. it's one of at least 80 federal economic agencies. h.u.d. and ag and h.h.s. have all economic development grants as well. second, it's ineffective. it typically provides a very small part of any given project. the g.a.o. reports that most of its financing does not have any significant effect on the success of projects and produce at best inconclusive results. in some cases may even detract from a more flexible work

force. third, this is an incredibly wasteful agency. it was identified by g.a.o. one of the agencies that ought to go away. indeed, a recent inspector general audit totaling $25 million showed that 25% of the grant money had been wasted due to various violations of e.d.a. grant violations. four of the projects were never completed. finally and perhaps more importantly, this is not the role of the federal government. as the cato institute has written, the federal government has no business trying to direct economic activity through politicized subsidy vehicles like e.d.a. we've seen that with bad outcomes like solyndra only too recently. now, every great journey starts with a single step. this is a small agency. this is the time for the first time in decades that we eliminate an entire program, an entire agency so they cannot grow and grow and grow as part of our federal government.

i ask my colleagues to support the e.d.a. elimination act. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. lee, for five minutes. ms. lee: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, as one of the founding members of the congressional out-of-poverty caucus, i rise today in my ongoing effort to sound the alarm on poverty. as you may know, the census released data showing that 46.2 million americans lived in poverty in 2010. the data also revealed that the poverty rate for whites was 9.9% in 2010 and worse the poverty rate for african-americans was 27.4%. for latinos, the poverty rate was 26.6%. and for asian-pacific americans, the poverty rate was 12.1%. and these statistics come on

the somber anniversary of the 10 years of the war in afghanistan, which was a blank check that should not have been written and, of course, i could not support. and in many ways, this war has significantly contributed to these staggering statistics which we know are not just numbers but these are human lives. so we must create jobs and we have to create a way to maintain our social safety net. so today i'm here to ask my colleagues to join 47 members of congress and me in a letter to the joint select committee on deficit reduction asking them to protect vital programs that comprise our social safety net including but not limited to medicaid, medicare and social security as well as the programs that provide the economic security and opportunity to millions of americans. and i ask for unanimous consent

to place the copy of this letter into the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. lee: thank you. none of us envy the work of those members on this joint select committee on deficit reduction as they will have to make tough choices that affect the lives of millions of americans. however, we should all recognize that for the last 25 years when we have come to deficit reduction agreements these agreements have for the most part protected low-income programs. we absolutely cannot balance the budget on the backs of the most vulnerable, those people facing or living in poverty. this is really a moral obligation that we cannot ignore. these programs assist over the 46 million americans living in poverty in 2010, men, women, children, young and old alike, from all backgrounds in obtaining or maintaining their access to basic, mind you -- and i'm just talking about basic human needs, including food, shelter and health care. .

these programs both support and create consumers which results in increased demand and job creation. this of course reduces our deficit by enabling people to participate in this economy. . these programs do provide pathways out of poverty and opportunities for all. more and more americans are struggling to find work and struggling to make ends meet and until we create jobs, and we have a way, pathway where people clearly can provide -- can be provided these opportunities, we have a real moral obligation to protect these programs. anything short of this is really un-american. in times like these, it's unconscionable to consider cutting programs that help those most in need like our nation's seniors and our nation's children. asking the joint select committee for deficit reduction to protect these vital human programs is though not enough,

we have to do more. the most effective anti-poverty program is an effective jobs program. so while i ask my colleagues to join me on the letter to the joint select committee, i'm also here to ask speaker boehner to move the american jobs act as soon as possible to begin to create jobs and put americans to work. americans want to work and they need to work. and yet the house leadership is really focused as an example on the dismantling of environmental regulations. this is not a jobs program that puts americans to work, it's a cynical, opportunistic move in order to protect the environment. we have to have as our priority efforts to create jobs that give americans economic security and grow our economy. our economy will not recover quickly from this great recession and of course great depression in many communities of color, including african-american community, and for those living in poverty unless we really do provide a

pathway out of poverty. we need to target these programs in areas that need it the most. and many of these areas are communities of color where the poverty rates are three times higher than the poverty rate for whites. the unemployment rates are also higher in communities of color. 16.7% of african-americans unemployed. 11.3% of latinos. and these are just the reported statistics. it's clear we must address these disparities as we work to create jobs and opportunities for all. i'm asking members to join us in this deficit reduction letter and urge the speaker and leadership of this house to move the american jobs act as the first step in jump-starting this economy and putting americans back to work. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. dold, for five minutes. mr. dold: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dold: thank you, mr.

speaker. just last week i had the opportunity to host a manufacturer's round table to hear first hand from job creators in the 10th district of illinois. these business leaders spoke about the challenges that they are facing and how decisions made right here in washington, d.c., impact their ability to create jobs and put illinois back to work. the entrepreneurs i met with expressed their concern with the uncertainty in the marketplace and spoke about the difficulties they face when competing in a global marketplace. from trade to excessive regulations, it is clear that much work needs to be done right here in washington, d.c. despite the problems that our country and businesses face, i am optimistic about the future. just yesterday the president sent long anticipated trade agreements to congress for approval. we heard the president talk about his jobs act.

and while there may be some disagreement about the jobs act, certainly i think there is areas where we can agree. and i think that we ought to move those affects forward. certainly when we talk about the trade agreements, i would argue that's one of the areas that has broad bipartisan support and we should move it forward for the american public. we have 650 manufacturers in illinois' 10th congressional district, representing 80,000 jobs. 50,000 of those jobs rely upon exports. and i would argue that our ability to open and expand markets will create that demand . 73% of the world's purchasing power is outside of the united states. 95% of the consumers are outside the united states' borders. we want to make sure we have an agreement, arrangement where we can knock down these barriers, where we can allow the american worker to compete on a level playing field. if we are able to do that, the american worker will win. we know that for every $1

billion that we increase in trade, we create 6,250 jobs right here at home. we know it would adjust with south korea alone would add $10 billion to our g.d.p. this is a step certainly in the right direction. in illinois manufacturing accounts for 93% of our exports, and these exports support 25% of the manufacturing jobs in our state. a state that's lost 750,000 manufacturing jobs over the last decade. small businesses are also a big part of those exports. by ratifying the pending trade agreements we are empowering manufacturers, small business owners, and entrepreneurs. this is exactly the type of bipartisan action we need to be taking in these tough economic times. while there is much more work that needs to be done, we should be encouraged by the movement on the trade agreements and use this as a steppingstone to continue working together and finding

common ground. when we come together for the american public, we can create an economic certainty that allows small business owners, all across the land, to be able to forecast, have some more certainty, invest in their business, and create jobs. there are 29 million small businesses in our nation. if we can create an environment here in washington, d.c., where half of those businesses can create one job, think about where we would be then. i ask my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to come together to pass these pending trade agreements, put the american worker first. and let's get america back to work. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. rangel, for five minutes. mr. rangel: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. rangel: this morning i was pleased to see that the council

of catholic bishops have organized in order to influence washington as it relates to the question of same-sex marriage and abortion. i think that we all agree that these are moral issues and under our country's freedom of speech the churches, the synagogues, temples have a right and indeed in their case an obligation to speak out of the actions of congress that they disapprove of morally. i hope that this is a signal to other religious institutions that what this country is going through is not only a financial crisis but a moral crisis. and that perhaps the other religions might broaden their agenda to talk about what i

truly believe is a priority and concern of every religion and that is a deep-seated moral obligations to take care of the vulnerable until our society. whether it's the lesser of our brothers and sisters, whether it's the sick and the aged, something about social security and medicare and medicaid, about having a home and a job that to me has something that involves a moral obligation, when a great country like the united states, a beacon for people that come from all over the world in order to be successful, finds itself with so much of our national wealth being concentrated in the hands of so few of people, never before has this happened in history, where we find more and more children and adults going into poverty in historic

numbers, where we find the shrinking of our middle class, where all of our dreams and aspirations are planted, born, and conceived in the united states of america. where we have so many brave american men and women fighting causes in foreign countries that their parents don't understand and they come home with emotional and physical disabilities that we can never thank them for their courage. and when we see young people in wall street and the wall street s around this country protesting and they are being ridiculed because they have no leaders, they have no single cause, they never knew each other, they are not organized, but neither is america's pain

and concern organized. people are mad as hell. they really think that they have been let down. they work so hard to achieve what they had achieved in this great country, and the greatest thing about america is not what you achieved, in my opinion, it's having the hope that you can make it in america. and so that's why it is so painful to see how this middle class, who is more recently if you look at history formed in this country, where people thought that having a car and a home and a job, sending your kids to college for an education, being secure in your retirement and knowing that one day health care would be available for everybody. are these just political issues? no. i think they are moral issues and that's why when i went down

to meet with the protestors i hoped that will all of our spiritual leaders would be there, to give guidance, to give encouragement, to give direction so that we can say that this is a civilized society and people just can't break the law and scream. but they can demand attention and that's what they are doing. so it seems to me that we in the congress are getting involved too politically and ignoring the main and the suffering that's taking place in this country today. when we can find one of the parties saying that they will not entertain a bill that's being proposed to us in order to put america back to work, when they say that their primary goal is to get rid of obama, when they say that no jobs bill is going to be accepted except what they pick and choose, when they refuse to bring to the floor of this house something that we can

discuss to give hope back to the people, i think that's not just a political question, i think it's a moral question as well. god, yes, god, bless america. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from indiana, mr. bucshon, for five minutes. mr. bucshon: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. bucshon: mr. speaker, i rise today to honor u.s. army private first class brett everwood. p.f.c. wood, a 19-year-old native in spencer, indiana, lost his life in combat on september 9, in kandahar, afghanistan, during an insurgent attack on his unit with an improvised explosive device. he was assigned to the first battalion, fifth infantry regiment of the first striker brigade combat team, 25th division, fort wayne write,

alaska. indiana lost a great citizen who enlisted with his brother during the summer of 2010. his sacrifice and valor in defense of the freedoms we hold dear should be commended and i would like to offer my most heartfelt condolences to p.f.c. woods' family and friends. from a grateful nation he will be missed but not forgotten. with that i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. costa, for five minutes. mr. costa: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. costa: mr. speaker, i rise this morning to honor and pay tribute to an outstanding service and dedication of the honorable judge oliver w. ranger on the occasion of his retirement last week from the united states district court for the eastern district of california. for the paths 20 years the judge has served the people of california admirably and courageously, a commitment to the justice and fairness of the law.

moreover, he is extremely knowledgeable and always attempted to balance the scales of justice when hearing cases in general and specifically to cases dealing with california's water and environmental issues. during his tenure, district court judge wranger has developed a mastery of complex federal and state water and endangered species law, putting forth many substantial rulings entitling lengthy and several hundred pages, requiring painstaking attention to detail. . some of the most north worthy is with respect to the operations of the central valley project and state water project that conveys water supplies throughout the state of california, including the san joaquin valley and southern california for urban use, for agriculture use. were it not for the judge's attention to the letter of the law, farmers, farm workers and

farm communities in the valley would continue to suffer from job losses and uncertain during the most recent drought period while federal agencies and this administration clung to flawed science and regulations that were destructive. judge wager has worked tirelessly on these issues, often putting in 75 to 80 hours a week. his retirement now leaves only two active judges in the already understaffed district court which extend from the oregon border to the mountains south of bakersfield. in a letter to judge anthony -- chief judge anthony eshee regarding his retirement, he had concerns about the unbearable workload that his departure will create. and let me read from his letter. the impacts on these judges is best understood by my latest -- my last five years. 161 jury trials to verdict,

5,465 courtroom hours, 3,554 terminal and civil cases in which the individual caseload approaching 1,200 cases in a five-year period. judge wager also went on to say, now who will handle these cases? despite our pleas to and congress' expressed recognition of the need, the continued refusal to have desperately needed judgeships for the eastern district of california has created a hardship on the federal court. it's been more than 31 years since a new district judge position was created in fresno, a division with over 2 1/2 million people. the continued erosion of the eastern district courts' ability to provide a timly and effective judicial service is a burden on our nation and the litigants should not suffer, end of quote in his letter. what judge wager pointed out that it's not only a disservice

of the men and women who serve the court but the individuals throughout the region and the businesses whose cases are delayed years in some cases. this surely was not what our founding fathers had in mind for our country when they ensured that all americans have a right to a speedy trial. as we know, justice delayed can oftentimes be justice denied. although the problem's not unique to the eastern district of california, it is the problem where it is most pronounced, with by far the nation's largest caseload per judge. legislation has been introduced in the house and the senate to create additional judgeships in district courts where the need is greatest. unfortunately it has not been acted on. it's past time for the congress to act on these bills to ensure that all branches of government are in fact working for the american people. in closing, i want to publicly thank judge alvery wager for

his service to our nation. and i ask unanimous consent to enter judge wager's letter into the record. i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. scott, for five minutes. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, americans are hurting. and there's nothing more important right now for every member of congress than fostering job growth for the american people. house republicans have been focused on this since day one. we passed more than a dozen pro jobs bills that is awaiting action in the senate. we have passed a -- america must lead the world out of this global recession. and i for one believe if we get a couple things right in washington we will see our economy turn around and therefore the world economy turn around. in the house we believe in helping small business. we believe in free trade and

shrinking bureaucracy. measures have already passed the house with bipartisan support, i might add, mr. speaker. only to solve in a democratically controlled senate. mr. speaker, democrats and republicans invite the senate to join our efforts. mr. speaker, american can't wait. it's time for the senate to help restore our economy. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. speier, for five minutes. ms. speier: thank you, mr. speaker. today i rise once again to talk about the epidemic of rape in the military. this is the ninth time that i stood on the floor of this house to speak about the unspeakable. each of these military members have served proudly for their country. each of them has been raped. and each has been revictimized

by a system of justice that protects perpetrators and punishes victims. i will continue to share these stories until something changes. survivors can email me at stopmilitaryrape@mail d.o.t. house.gov if they would like to -- stopmilitaryrape@mail.house.gov . one's job was an explosive ordnance disposal technician. in other words, she was responsible for disposing i.e.d.'s before they went off so she took on one of the toughest jobs in the military. yet during basic training she heard her commanders equated being female of being weak or incompetent. they used terms to describe women that cannot be repeated on this floor. commanders required sergeant

and her colleagues to attend classes regarding prevention of sexual assault and harassment once a year. commanders made a mockery of these classes as the instructor would describe prohibited conduct. one or more of the soldiers would begin engaging in that conduct. one soldier stripped completely naked and get on the table during a break in the middle of class. his punishment was to serve as equal opportunity representative and lead the next sexual assault harassment training. disgusting is too benign a word to describe this conduct. the sergeant deployed to afghanistan in 2006. her supervisor sexually harassed her. he began to slap her bottom whenever he passed by. he belittled and mocked her. only one occasion he told her exactly what he wanted to do with her in graphic detail. nothing was done in response.

it was another colleague, one from the k-9 unit that raped her. he even photographed the rape and some of the pictures ended up on a pornographic website. imagine a system of justice in such shambles that an assailant would actually take pictures of the crime and put them on the internet. sergeant havrilla reported the rape under the military's restricted reporting policy. in february of 2009 she reported for four weeks of active duty training. while there she ran into her rapist and went into shock. she immediately sought the assistance of the military chaplain. the chaplain told her that it must have been god's will for her to be raped and recommended that she attend church more frequently. god's will? this is the support system for victims of rape and sexual assault in the military?

sergeant harilla now suffers from posttraumatic stress disorder. she said this, leadership needs to be held accountable and women need to be able to work without the fear of being assaulted by their own colleagues. this is one of the hardest things i've done and i want to thank the other women who have stepped forward as well. it's never easy to put yourself out there. sergeant havrilla is right. it's time for leadership to be held accountable. leadership in the pentagon, leadership at the white house and leadership here in congress. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. thompson, for five minutes. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. thompson: thank you, mr. speaker. today i rise to recognize the

many hospital professionals that serve every day to keep our communities leading strong, healthy lives. having spent 28 years as a therapist, rehabilitation services manager andland administration, i know firsthand the many challenges this industry continues to face. medicare and medical assistance payments are just a few of the many variables beyond a hospital's control. medicare that only pays 80 cents to 90 cents for every dollar of cost in delivering care. medical assistance that only pays 40 cents to 60 cents for every dollar of cost in delivering care. as congress continues to work on issues impacting this industry, it is important to recognize the critical role our hospitals play in not only providing access to cost-effective care but also economic growth. in my home state of pennsylvania, more than 584,000 individuals depend on hospitals

for their jobs through direct and indirect employment. the economic contributions made by pennsylvania's hospitals to local communities continues to increase. rising to 98.9 billion dollars in 2010. and that's up from $89.8 billion in -- during 2008. when 268,000 hospital employees spend money on product and services, it translates to nearly 317,000 additional hospital service-related jobs and more than $13 billion in employee compensation. more than $2 billion is generated directly and indirectly by pennsylvania hospitals. in 55 of the 67 pennsylvania counties, hospitals remain one of the top five employers, providing family-sustaining

jobs. every additional dollar in the hospital sector results in 92 cents of wages to other pennsylvania industries. at a time marked by so much uncertainty, lawmakers need to ensure that hospitals remain viable assets in our communities where they can provide jobs, support other businesses and continuing offering these critical services. hospitals are about access to quality care and jobs. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until noon today.

at the new jersey state house. while the topic was not announced, the speculation he will say whether he will run for president in 2012, and reports indicate that the governor has decided not to run for president. we will find out this afternoon at 1:00 p.m. we will have it live for you on c-span2 and online on c- span.org. there is a hearing on mexican criminal organizations. the committees will hear from administration officials discussing u.s. policy on mexican drug cartels and other criminal groups. that is live at 2:00 p.m. eastern on c-span3. the u.s. house coming back at noon eastern. meantime, we're going to take to lead to the commission on

wartime contract in in iraq and afghanistan. they released their final report in late august, saying an estimated $31 billion had been lost due to waste, fraud, and abuse. the hearing has been underway for about an hour, so this is live here on c-span. >> -- only to that particular agency. the special inspector general would have jurisdiction over the range of agencies that relate to contingencies, all three of them. further, there would be the opportunity, because of the oversight, to ensure that the whole range of issues is fully vested. one of the questions i hope the committee continues to explore is, what in the world is wrong over the department of defense? this is page 162, and this has to do with the defense contracting audit agency, which seems aptly named. but it says -- you mentioned

this. the current unaudited backlog stands at $550 billion, having risen sharply from four hundred $6 billion in only nine months. current staffing levels, it is reported that the backlog will continue to go virtually unchecked and will exceed $1 trillion by 2016. >> can i try and deal with that? >> absolutely. >> dcaa does not have enough people. when i was there, it was about 4000. it is nothing compared to the number of contracts that are going on. these are very professional folks. many of them come from the outside and come into

government, as much as lawyers do it these days. this goes to the point there was made earlier by commissioner henke. even in this time of cutting budgets and deficits, there has to be some spending to save money. it is a matter of being penny wise and pound foolish. we will wind up hurting the government and the industry. industry because they are not getting paid when they should be getting paid. >> i will change the word "might" to "will." if you have these audits, you're going to discover bills that were submitted that were either for allegedly submitted or just mistakes and they were paid more than they should be paid. all these companies have to keep

these records on file for two, evene , four, five, s years. so this $500 million -- excuse me, a 500 billion is going to -- $500 million is going to accelerate. >> the gao recently released a report in september document there are at least 58,000 contracts awarded that much still be reviewed and closed out. the numbers are staggering. i would call upon the white house to please prioritize these and get the senate over there to do their job. we have three of the five that are still unfilled.

i yield back. i now recognize mr. towns. you.thank it's good to see my colleague. i think the members of the commission for their outstanding work they are doing. there are people that will say that even though the recommendation that the problem in terms of getting it funded which will probably be around 21 million, that will just not happen. the extent of fraud and abuse and one stunning example, the united states government paid $900 for a control switch that was worth only $7.

contractors were found over- billing the government with markups ranging from 12,000% for goods and services. this is a course of action that must not continue. and i hope that this congress, led by this committee, can accept the commission cost recommendation and put measures in place that are necessary to show americans that the government can be better stewards of taxpayers. how do make the case when people say, now you are going again, you want to spend additional money? what do we say to them? >> well, we say to them, you'll

save a lot more than you'll spend. we're talking about not just $9 but protection payments and protection rackets in afghanistan and some estimates are over $350 million . case after case of projects that are the millions and sometimes in the billions. if you weigh the small amounts of money against these huge amounts, it is kind of a no- brainer. >> commissioner tiefer spent a lot of time on chapter three, which deals with the inattention to contract in leads to massive waste, fraud, and abuse. this book could have been three times as thick if we let them

put in everything he wanted to put in. you read that and you did not go through the argument that you're presenting. >> yes, if i could just add to that. this is a perfect time to be making these kinds of investments. in the department of defense and state department, how they can best position themselves for the future with fewer resources. this is the perfect time to say we can make investments to try and prevent this waste and to try to get a better return on this investment. i would argue this is the time to be making these sorts of resource allocation decisions. >> i think the chairman for his kind remarks.

the good stuff is in our report. and give you an example where we have the limited amount of money for personal we could save a lot of money. we of a giant contract to come to an end and we should compete them right then. we had a food-service contract that came to an end and because we didn't have the personnel to move fast enough to compete now, that got extended i bases, a $4 billion extension because the agency was not ready to compete at the point. >> thank you. my time has experience. >> thank you for the long work you have done.

chapter 7section in that deals with the complexity of the suspensions and disbar ments. a couple of questions i had. you're dealing with foreign contractors, u.s. contractors, or both on that? >> we are dealing with both. we did not deal with domestic non-war contractors. techniques that reduce the amount of procedure, but we were not trying to impose them on domestic non-wartime contracts. >> recommendations on how to be able to resolve that. that is something we do with government-wide that we have on

how often they are used. are their recommendations on that? >> there are several. i will name one. it to be possible to suspend on a documentary record without holding a mini trial as is required domestically. we've seen where it is almost impossible to pull together witnesses from afghanistan to do a suspension trial. >> when i served -- with your permission, sir. i served on this committee, i was stunned by the rights that we give contractors when the work with the government. even one week over pay -- even when we overpay, inmates take us a year to adjust that -- it may

take us a year to adjust that. we give privileges before, during, and after a contract. this committee needs to examine if we should be giving contractors so many rights and privileges during times of war that could drive up the decision for a year. they say is not worth waiting a year and we'll just keep them. >> did you run into situations where it was a sole source and you would see a need for a suspension or a disbarment? --don't have other folks >> countless times. >> how do we get around that? >> i think it is all those

things -- the lack of organic capacity. there's limited competition among contractors. there's limited oversight capacity. that is why these recommendations in our report -- this is important to put all of these things together to solve the problem. >> other comments on that? >> one comment. you remember perhaps the incident at the kabul incide ane sea where they were trading -- at the kabul and the saembassy. they did not say to go home to more because we're bringing our own people. the contractor stay there for more than 18 months after that incident, still in place, still

billing the government, and that is unacceptable. >> have the since been disbarred -- have a date since been debarred -- have they since been disbarred? >> this was a low-bid contract. >> you have an extensive section using human trafficking. that is a stark comment, that some of the work is basically done with slave labor. how extensive do you think that is? >> we understand it is quite extensive. they bring people in, hold on to their passports, and essentially

lock them up as prisoners. >> and we are aware of that? >> everybody is aware of it now after our report and people were aware of it before our report. what are we going to do, bring witnesses in from these companies? we of to modify that slyly and suspend these people -- we have to modify that and suspend these people. >> i think there is a lot more to this story than any of us have confronted. >> thank you. >> thank you. we could hear the rest of the day or the week. you did a great job. i will make a number of points. thank you for continuing the

argument on the special inspector general. i want to convince my friend that his name would be valuable as a sponsor on that bill. the other thing i think is lessons learned. we failed to learn the lessons of iraq. a contingency inspector general would be able to go in with that knowledge and the halt repository of them to be able to go wind and think that is the importance. >> i agree with that. that person would be in place at the outset. >> somebody would set up. you make a great point about restructuring the needs to

happen and i think part of that means giving value to those positions. if people think it is overseeing, we have to find a way for those agencies to give value to be in that position. it has a value in more sense than just a dollar. we will be looking to work on that to see how we can work with the departments and change that factor. if we try to do too much and if we have enough people to man it, maybe we should rethink the mission. whether we should be there or not or be there in the way that we are should be dictated on what our capacity is and to do well and to do right. on the wartime risk-management that were done

with just the other day. we recommend debarment. we were told they were going to do that. that we found out, not so much. there was a slap on the wrist saying they could not do a trucking contract. they said he did not understand what they were talking about. we need to make sure there is accountability and the whole notion of food and oil. the idea that we've not done a good idea of getting contracts that are meaningful. there was no insight and vision into the subcontracting. contrasting to a bunch of middlemen that did not own trucks -- contracting to a bunch

of middlemen that did not own trucks. that's a notion you are helpful in pointing out. thank you. my question is on sustainability. what does congress have to do to make sure we do not invest in areas that cannot be sustained by the host government? >> this relates to your point about the mission. sustainability was important enough to us. we have eight separate special report on that. we make a recommendation that you should be cancelling the project that are not going to be sustainable. that is something that could happen right now. you violate the projects that money is being put into right now. this is a short-term, immediate, dollar-value task that the agencies can take on.

>> annual reports about the whole contingency contract an area. that would give you a vehicle for double checking. if for some reason the project got started but slipped past, you could catch them. you have an opportunity every single year to catch them. >> what is stunning is the number of ways with determined -- $30 billion to $60 billion, and many think is closer to $60 billion. this is a real figure. , specialty -- could i respond to your special id you're making?

you are in the best position to see this because you know sometimes the armed service committee because of the relationship they have with the military isn't looking at things they need to look at. sometimes the foreign affairs committee is not going to get as something you know you need to look at because of the relation they have. the ig's develop relationships. there are certain things they are willing to do and there are certain things they are not willing to do. for a lot of them, it is a club. they do not want to offend the department they are in. that is why sometimes you need the competition. we did not look at something i wanted to look at.

my staff did not want to look at. then the armed services looked at it and it was a huge issue. sometimes we looked at issues that they did not look at. the chairman is in the best position to see that. >> they have a full plate without even contingency operations with the amount of money they are in charge of. >> it is an add-on. >> the state department set up a middle east regional office to do audit work overseas. this set up late. they did a review two to three years, and it was in good, so they have to stand down.

>> one last comment. this committee is using our members will and maybe you want to tackle some of the recommendations to see if we need to translate that into legislation and how we do that and to follow up with the agencies so that this is not one product that just sits on the shelves. the work was too good for us and fit so squarely and gives us all something that we can work on together that i think would be a great example for congress. i ask that you entertain that thought. thank you. >> thank you to the commission for the grim work that you were asked to do and that you did do. we trust to allow the

beneficial outcomes as we tackle it. along with the cost and the problems with the contracts while they are in operation, the gao just released a report in september documented at least 58,000 contracts awarded between 2003 and 2010 still need to be reviewed and closed out. delays waste millions of dollars as improper payments, waste, fraud, and becomes almost impossible to detect and recoup. this is because the files are lost and contractors disappear in the contingency zone. let me ask this question commissioner zakheim. >> they are extremely important.

if you do not close out a contract, you can still in theory spend money. that money probably should not be spent. it is taxpayer money and probably going in the wrong way to the wrong people. we have seen cases where contractors are using people may be 1/5 of the time but being paid full-time. when you look at thousands upon thousands of contracts that have not been closed out, which means they have not been properly audited, by the way. if you're not auditing a contract for years and the government is paying for the time in between the audit and having to take place, the tax payer is being hit with a

double lewhammy. that's just ridiculous. >> congressman shays, good to see you again. what steps should be taken to accelerate this process? >> let me just say that honesty. look at the numbers. and i need to say that congress needs to share in this burden. this isn't just the administration. congress needs to be advocating that these positions be filled. >> i will take that one on again. i would emphasize the need to hire more dcaa people, more auditors.

it's as simple as that. >> we're not talking about thousands of people. dcaa is scrambling to get 100 auditors added in 2013 to attack this a backlog of work. maybe this committee could look at funding that on a fee basis so they are able to scale up and perform the work they are being asked to do. >> let me add -- commissioner thibault worked very hard on the specifics of the personnel and the scale of the on audited contracts -- the unaudited contracts. dcaa is short on personnel and

they have a choice between auditing the backlog or handling their real-time responsibilities such as when contract is awarded, they're supposed to order the proposal to make sure that is right. they in effect sacrificed letting the backlog grow and grow. that is how it grew and grew. >> thank you. is the obama administration aware of this problem? >> oh, i think so . and help congress is -- and i hope congress is, as well. >> thank you, mr. chairman. one of the things i find

interesting in this discussion is that congress almost never takes responsibility for our part of a problem. we had leadership especially in the armed services committee at the time that pooh-poohed the idea. as a result, we quadrupled out subcontracting but increase contract in personnel by only 3%, and now we're surprised that we cannot account for all the dollars that were appropriated. i think that heard that one of the answers was we need more capability at dcaa to be able to account for those dollars. >> this commission was able to be so bipartisan is because we realize the fault lie with both

parties and all the branches. >> we have had a mindless dialogue about the need to shrink the size of the federal government. whenever talk about the need to invest or eight substantial payoff down the road. if we could have saved that money, whenever we invested in additional person out what has been more than returned back. i assume that is in part your testimony as well. those relatively modest investment up front what have big payoffs in helping to deter or your report documents in iraq and afghanistan. >> i cannot disagree with you. we have to play catch-up ball. the blame lies everywhere.

it started in 1990's. a chunk of that dividend was to cut the very people you're talking about. so there is blame there. large contracts were not definitize properly. we all agree that there is something that needs to be done, it needs to be done now, in needs to be done in the interests of this country, and politics don't enter into it. >> politics enter into it when you decide a project and what investments you will or will not make. i would be glad to bring it to the floor of the house and you could watch some of our debates. often we seem to know the cost of everything and the value of

nothing around here. the estimate of loss is $31 billion to $60 billion. why such a wide array in your report? how much would you attribute that to lost money indigenously, we're your hired local trucking companies and may lose the fuel or whenever it may be. >> we applied a broad definition of waste to let that opportunity cost, how much money you could spend on other things. we include excess of requirements that would not -- that were now required. we include port project that did not fit the local cultures or the local politics. we include on anticipated security costs.

you have a contract and all of sudden you have to hire security because it is a dangerous area. we do not include sustain the cost. why such a wide range? you cannot do a bottom-up study on this. you heard 50,000 of them have not been finalized yet. we don't have enough information to build a bottom-up number. we found a lot of examples of that are in chapter 3. a top-down estimate is insufficient. our number is 10% to 20% of that $60 billion. and fraud, that part which is

based on another estimate by the certified fraud examiners, we assume 5% to 9%. we don't know how much has been siphoned off by all these crooks. it's just hard to get to. it gets to visibility overt subcontracts. those are the guys that are paying these crooks off. on page 73, we show a bill the commissioner shays and i were given a copy of when we were in afghanistan. these are a bunch of crooks saying, if you want protection, here's the number to call. this is something out of hbo. >> one of things that expanded the array of ways with the change from iraq to afghanistan.

you set us up and sent us out, iraq was a big contract eprom. now it is afghanistan -- iraq was a big contract in problem. they have been looking at that. you have a country that is so poor in afghanistan that they cannot sustain what we're building when we are gone. iraq wasn't poor and the way that afghanistan is poor. so we have a different set of problems. >> congressman shays, i found your comment to be fascinating and a lot to export a labatt. you said the one thing -- one recommendation is that we're doing too much. could you elaborate on that.

>> this is a dialogue that took place among the members. first with what we have to manage these contractors better and if we manage them better, we will not have waste. then we realized it was more than that. if we could not manage them better, maybe we should not do as much because we cannot manage them. even if you can manage them, we began to see so many things happening. when you have a wonderful contract in afghanistan that costs $80 million doing fitting -- costs $18 million, and the federal government says there will increase to program a to $350 million and then you get to

finish it by the fiscal year, that is crazy. we saw that time and time again. we simply think we just got beyond our capability to manage. we've won a father than that. -- we went farther than that. >> i'm a freshman member. it was by opening to see what we're trying to accomplish there and all the money we are wasting. this is not just we are mismanaging. we are wasting the money of the american people. i'm frustrated and i get frustrated when i hear on my side of the aisle that we cannot do anything about fraud, waste, and abuse in the military. we should look and all the areas but we cannot do with in the military. this just blows my mind.

so any of the recommendations, do they address this particular issue? i read these 25 recommendations and i see better management. i don't think we can manage. we're doing too much. which of the specific recommendations hits the hardest of your concerns -- hits at the heart of your concern? >> if ever by takes the blame, no one is responsible. we have tried to start to have people accountable. the dual-headed person would have to be approved by the senate bill would have it right to make decisions in the nfc and also at omb. that person will have to answer about the waste and all the money being spent. having a j-10 -- when contract

does not work right, they will go to the j-10. that person in charge of this, they will feel a little responsible for sale, "i think we're doing to much and it will fall on my desk and i will have to take the head." -- i will have to take the h it." to tell doing nothing the military or other agencies that we're doing too much in areas. >> one of the values of this committee is that i think this committee is more willing to look at dod in a fresh way, and say you are also part of the

mix. not quite addressing the answer, but i see that much colleague -- >> i think our present fiscal situation is action as dire as it is. the fiscal situation is very different from the way was 10 years ago. we cannot afford to undertake the range of missions now that we could 10 years ago. this kind of question, whether we should engage in it at all, oversight or a, will be preceded by whether we should undertake it at all. >> i agree with you and thank you for your answer and for your work. i wish i would see that more in members of congress. i still see members of congress saying we need to give congress

a pass. i can see how we can make a huge difference by making small changes. thank you. >> the gentleman from vermont. >> thank you for your work on this. and mr. shays, welcome to you and to all the contractors. you have done a great job. it is so it's refreshing to of content we can put our arms around and find common ground to hopefully get something done. most of us would prefer to get something constructiove down. the general comment is that if we assign this huge job like the war in iraq to the military and they have limited resources, contract allows the illusion

that there's a to pass it that does not exist. all we have to do is throw money at the problem. it does not work. the real discipline has to be on what it is we expect -- what assignment we impose on the military. if we are not willing to address the capacity question that you have identified, then it will result in failure in a matter how much oversight we have. the work in getting that bottle of water from here up through pakistan, through afghanistan, a journey of taken many times, mr. shays. whatever has to be done by the military to get that bullet, to get the bottle of water to our soldier. they will deal with all the chaos and all the wasted money afterwards. that is our problem.

thank you for focusing on that. we're going to be transitioning -- we are transitioning in iraq. among the task will be asking the state department to do our activities traditionally done by the military and seen traditionally as military functions. there will be wrestling hostages were responding to attacks on the road -- they will be saving hostages. >> the devil of course is in the details of how they interpret the words in the guidance. the question now becomes what to a disease do with their guidance?

the stable perhaps argue that we don't do combat and -- the state will perhaps argue that we do not do combat. i think that leads to the conclusion that the embassy in kabul can be provided -- can be guarded by contractors. it is still appropriate. >> what about a hostage rescue team? >> if you're going to rescue people, that is correct. >> what about convoys security in afghanistan? would that be appropriate for contractors under the new omb guidance? >> security operations performed

in direct support of combat as part of a larger integrated armed force. so those convoys are providing military goods. it seems to me there are indirect support of combat operations. >> one thing is getting lost. the government should do it. it does mean the government should not do it. our point is that we look at risk. if the risk is high, to be leaning toward suggesting that a government do it. what is disconcerting about ambassador kennedy's response -- basically dod is leaving iraq. state is saying we're doing at,

but it is not inherently governmental. we fear they are saying it because they do not want to appear like they're not abiding by the law. >> thank you. a look for to be eight the tenant for you -- i look forward to being a intended for you -- and look for for being a lieutenant for you. >> i have one question. i did not want to be redundant. i was in a meeting. he said there should be commissioner to oversee these issues. it seems to me that there is -- that seems like another layer of

bureaucracy that we have to deal with. if the people who are supposed to review these contracts and watch over waste, fraud, and here is a buddy- buddy relationship, which replace them with somebody who is not biased. t doesn't make sense, especially in times when we have these fiscal problems. these things have a way of a mushrooming. i would like to get your comment on that. if we have commissions like you that talked about specific problems with an agency where they are not police improperly, we could make the request that

that person be replaced so that there wouldn't be the body-buddy relationship -- the buddy-buddy relationship that you are talking about. >> i will take a shot at that. i think what commissioner shays was referring to were the individual ig's in the agency getting too close sometimes. >> i understand. >> it is their multi agency flavor. it's not just one agency that is spending money. there are 17 pages it that are spending money in afghanistan right now -- there are 17 agencies that are spending money in afghanistan right now. looking across the different agencies. so we would replace the special

inspector general for iraq. we would replace the special inspector general for afghanistan. they have done good work that the individual agencies were not able to do because they didn't have the authority. this is an efficient way to look at the money that the u.s. government is spending in these contingencies. >> that is the only question i had. >> i recognize the gentleman from illinois. >> thank you. always good to see you, congressman shays, and to know you're still involved in public service activity. i want to thank you and all of the other members of the commission for the tremendous work i think you have done. looking at this report sort of a

firms to make a lot of things that i have thought but didn't necessarily have the information of the data to go on. and then when i read it, i'm saying, yes, that's kind of the way it is. that is so difficult it is. i thought in some societies and some neighborhoods in different places throughout the world, there's a saying that if you find a sucker, bump his head. that is how the culture evolved. it seems there are a lot of people in this country who become involved in one way or the other, who kind of see this is an opportunity to feed from the trough. if there is an opportunity, they

cannot resist. do it.annot not to r so my question kind of becomes, i guess whether or not this is almost seen as policy that we hire especially if we are in different countries and we have wars taking place. do we hire all these contractors as a way mollifying to some degree some of the elements that might be there that just makes it possible, or more possible that we can function and operate? commissioner. >> we do have policies as you describe them and we do want to

hire locals. it's wanting to hire locals and another thing to flood a country with money. mike kelly commissioner tiefer mentioned -- my colleague commissioner tiefer mentioned that. there is money coming off of trees as far as the afghans are concerned. maybe you should look much more carefully at how much the country can absorb before you start pouring the money and. if you're going to have local contractors and new line a policy to let people not alienated by your presence, then supervise them, and that is what we recommended in our commission report. whatever the circumstance in the united states in peacetime, when

you are using local subcontractors, the nine states government should be able to look at their books -- the united states government should be able to look at the books and of their books are not clean, you should turn of the mouth -- you should throw them out. >> you find recommendations to have stronger controls over foreign contractors in part because the kuwaiti contractors -- we depended upon them for the iraq war and they took us to the cleaners. it should have been american businesses. relatively small kuwaiti business grew to large size. this has an indictment where the press has estimated to settle the case would cost $750 million .

first kuwaiti has an unpaid bill of $124 million. the kuwaitis took us to the cleaners. >> i would say we want the ability to look at all foreign subcontractors, not just the one in petern theater. >> a tough job. i thank you very much. i yield back. >> i now recognize mr. murphy of connecticut. >> thank you. let me add my thanks to congressman shays for your great work on this committee. i think we're all pleased to see some real concrete proposals

before us. it is not often we get to see this kind of volume of could- forward-looking work. i want to talk about sustainability because i think this is key. your suggestion in some ways is a pretty radical suggestion because your first bullet point says essentially what you have repeated that we should examine current projects and take appropriate action to cancel or redesigned these programs. you point out that we will spend $13 billion on building up security forces alone and the total revenue coming into the afghan government is to billion dollars -- $2 billion. there is a lot of hope for some

long term new revenue sources related to a mineral production. that is it long term pie in the sky promignosis. what are you recommending here? a suggested you cut off all programs that cannot sustain themselves is perhaps a recommendation to stop funding the buildup of the afghan national security forces. it is a prescription to end its support for all on the main core missions that we have been doing. the other side is to admit that the american taxpayer is on the hook for a lot longer than we are. maybe we have to have a clear understanding that we're going to be into paying for the security forces much longer than the american public may understand. how radical a recommendation is

the idea that we should end projects there are not sustainable? >> i think your analysis is spot on, sir. a lot of these projects cannot be sustained absent continued american investment. i think we have to be honest about that. either the government continues to undertake these projects because they are critical to the united states or they are not critical and we cannot afford and therefore we have to stand down. >> general caldwell is plan to ratchet back the cost of treating the afghan forces. when the government wants to respond, it can respond. it still will cost us money.

at least if we focus more carefully on these projects and we decide that we do need them, as we need to train afghan forces, then we can cut these projects down to size and that is what general caldwell is doing. >> i want to add my voice. what we're saying is we cannot just eliminate everything that we think they cannot sustain. we have to reduce the amount or the size of projects to fit our capability to sustain them in the future. >> one specific issue you raised. i was in afghanistan last and it was a particular point made by our commanders in the field, how important these funds were to them in terms of building up their support of the community.

there is a different analysis and whether it is important for the here now in building support or whether it can be sustained in the long run. ideas of how can better control the usage of these funds. this is going to be a major debate. is is part of the approval process? >> i would recognize it for what it is. discuss the resources to do would -- just give us the resources to do it. it was on the order of $180 million with seized iraqi assets. blac complex.erator,

have the mission -- they have the mission but they don't have the money. they can send forces to do that. look at the existing agency that might be doing that mission. they might be more fully staffed. ings liket the in a s surp get out of control. $100 for a door. >> we spent a lot of time pursuing justice question. we asked the question of the different agencies -- have you come together to talk about -- the military timeline is today, they come today. the projects are out of sync.

we got no answer back from the agencies. we need to get done, the mission. but that is something that we just throw more money at it and it will be fixed when that is not the case. >> thank you. >> thank you very much. i want to thank all the members of the panel who served on the panel of wartime contracts including christopher shays. the bill worked on yes i went into effect for the victims' compensation fund for the 9/11 workers. i appreciate your leadership. [captioning performed by national captioning institute]

[captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] there are still contracts that have never been effectively we compete recompeted. there is money lost in contract waste, fraud, and abuse. it seems like some of these contractors are being treated like they are too big to fail. we passed legislation to end to big to fail. we cannot afford bailouts. -- we pass legislation to end too big to fail.

>> we're going to break away from the hearing. the u.s. house is coming in next. you'll see this on our video library. spending typically set by the budget year, one issue they will deal with. the house will start work on two bills dealing epa regulations on air emissions from cement plants. members will vote not debate rules this afternoon.

the speaker: the house will be in order. the prayer will be offered by our guest chaplain today, pastor jerry creayol, from the brush ashor baptist church in orlando, florida. the chaplain: lord god, i thank you for the moment that we can acknowledge one greater than the power of man. lord, as you guide the course of all creation in the events of mankind throughout history, may we willingly be in submission to your mighty hand. fill us with love, joy, peace, long suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance. lord, raise up leaders here that you can show yourself strong on behalf of them whose heart is perfect towards you. give us your wisdom to solve our problems, give us your

power to overcome our enemies, give us your compassion to meet people's needs. in the name of my lord and savior jesus christ who gives me freedom from the bondage of sin, liberty to stand for what is right, and the reason to live, amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the plemming pledge today will be led by the gentlelady from ohio, miss fufpblg. -- ms. fudge. ms. fudge: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side.

for what purpose does the gentlelady from kansas rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker: without objection, so ordered. ms. jenkins: to spur job creation in this country, we must remove burdensome regulation stifling our job creators. the e.p.a.'s maximum achievable control technology, or mact, rule, is set to crush our cement manufacturers. eastern kansas has three cement manufacturers who employ thousands. i recently toured plants at monarch cement in humboldt, ash grove cement, and la farming and heard a similar story from all three. they have the revenue stream and the desire to hire more kansans, but the cost of complying with government regulations like the cement mact restrict their ability to do so. the e.p.a. shouldn't be implementing regulations that do more economic damage than

they achieve in environmental good. i hope the e.p.a. will take this opportunity to reform their rules and be part of the solution rather than the problem. let's end overregulation and get americans back to work. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from ohio seek recognition? ms. fudge: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. fudge: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to address the job crisis in our nation. while we operate in a divided congress, americans are struggling. millions are unemployed, underemployed, and without the skills to be employed. more than 1.4 million americans have been out of work for more than 99 weeks. these americans want jobs. most americans don't understand the delay. many can't afford to wait. so why haven't we passed a jobs bill? president obama introduced his jobs plan with many of the provisions previously supported

by both republicans and democrats. what is stopping this congress from passing a jobs bill? i want every unemployed american to know that some of us really are working to get a jobs bill passed. we feel your pain. we know your struggle. and we must act now. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. wilson: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, the rally news observer reported -- raleigh news otherer reported that the rotesarry club in north carolina governor beverly perdue stated quote, i think we should suspend perhaps elections for congress in two years and just tell them we won't hold it against them, whatever decisions they make, or just let them help this country recover, end of quote. any governor, especially our great neighbor of the 10th largest state in the country, should be unwavering for citizens to have their votes

counted. elections are vital to accessibility and accountability. governor perdue fails to understand that house republicans have put job creation, economic growth, and limited spending at the center of the congressional agenda. since january house republicans have led efforts to help our economy recover by passing legislation to promote small businesses to create jobs. even as a joke, congress should not be a spess class separated from the citizens. the house has passed 90 bills this year and the senate has only passed 20. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from california. without objection, so ordered. >> thank you, mr. speaker. last week i held meetings in my district with over 50 businesses, not to talk to them but to listen to them. and i wanted to hear from small

businesses themselves, what is standing in your way and what do you need to succeed? and i heard that even in the sluggish economy these small businesses are finding opportunities, they want to hire and grow. ms. hahn: and difficult times cannot repress the ingenuity and determination of the american small businessperson. what they do need is access to capital to seize these opportunities. they need small business loans that don't take a small mountain of paperwork to apply for. they need us to pass the american jobs act to give them the tools they need to innovate and grow. congress bent over backwards to bail out wall street billionaires. where's the help for the ordinary men and women working on main street? congress needs to get our priorities straight. we should be fighting for small businesses that are the backbone of our economy. and the foundation of our american dream. i yield my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from illinois. without objection.

>> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to speak in honor of captain thomas hideman, a marine from mindota, illinois, who served our country. he was killed on september 19, 2011, at the age of 27 in a helicopter crash at camp pendleton, california. he was one of six children. his parents sent their son to holy cross school and he graduated in 2002 from saint bead academy in perfect cue. he's remembered throughout the community as a truly outstanding person. known by his family, friends, former coaches, and teammates as the all american boy, star athlete, a kind, supportive, good friend, and gentleman to all. mr. kinzinger: he was brought up with a strong set of core values. he worked hard and understood the importance of his family and friends and he truly cherished the time that he spent with them. captain heightman's passion was the fly. one of his former coaches said it was a dream come true for him to fly for the marines and be a pilot. i understand that dream.

captain thomas is a true patriot and dislaid the love for his country that separates the people of our great nation from any other in the world. our men and women in the military like captain heightman, work tirelessly to protect our country. their sacrifice is the reason for our liberty. while he will be sorely missed, it's because of his commitment and people like him that we can stand before you in a chamber like this today. god bless captain heightman's service and god bless his family. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois. without objection. >> mr. speaker, we have been in afghanistan for 10 years. two years ago on the 8th anniversary of our invasion of afghanistan, i stood in the same spot and asked, have our eight years, 791 american deaths and billions of u.s. doll argues spent in afghanistan made american safer? mr. quigley: my conclusions were no. two years later i'm asked the same questions and reaching the same conclusions.

al qaeda is still not primarily in afghanistan but pakistan, yemen, africa, and elsewhere. we still can't afford a vast ground war and rebuilding effort abroad. we should be fighting a smaller, smarter war that goes after terrorists instead of building nations. it's time to get out of afghanistan before another near passes and we are back here saying the same thing all over again. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from pennsylvania. >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. pitts: mr. speaker, i'd like to welcome members of the hospital and health system association of pennsylvania to washington today. hospitals are an essential piece of pennsylvania's economy. annually the total economic benefit for our state is $2.7 billion a year. more than 16,000 pennsylvanians are employed by hospitals and they are paid an average salary of more than 52,000 a year. in my home district, lancaster

general hospital is now the largest employer. doctors, workers, and others are contributing to our economy and saving lives and they are coming up with new ways to save lives, new methods to improve health and ways to reduce the cost of care. and working in a hospital is not easy. doctors, nurses, and administrators help individuals and families who are hurting or struggling with illness and disease and they work long hours performing difficult tasks. we thank our hospital professionals for their service, and as chairman of the energy and commerce health subcommittee, i will always listen to their voice as congress works to improve our health care system. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. baca: mr. speaker, the party of no is at it again. the republicans have been in the majority for 273 days and they still have no plans to create new jobs. now the republicans are saying no to the american job act,

with the majority leader calling this bill dead. but what the republicans are really saying no to are, they are saying no to helping small businesses grow and hire. they are saying no to keeping teachers in the classroom. they are saying no to keeping firefighters, first responders, cops on the jobs. they are saying no to building our crumbling roads, bridges, and schools. they are saying no to cutting taxes for hardworking american families. the american jobs act is a bipartisan approach with ideas that have been supported by both democrats and republicans. we must stop this political games. the american people are suffering. they need our help now. let's all say yes to putting americans back to work and pass this bipartisan agenda. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. over this past week i was

reminded that while my jewish friends and colleagues were celebrating rosh hashanah, the jewish new year, members of the united nations were considering a motion that would further jeopardize chances for middle east peace. i'm very concerned, mr. speaker, that the willingness of the u.n. to consider palestinian statehood despite united states calls to halt will embolden israel's enemies. this must stop now. mr. gardner: we must send a message their continued support for anti-israeli resolutions is unacceptable to the united states. as members of our house leadership, republican and democrat, recently said in a "new york daily news" op-ed, congress will not sit idly by. nor will i. . we can't let this be ignored and cast aside by the u.n. lasting peace will only succeed in the israelis and palestinians will come to the table for direct negotiations. peace is not easy as we have seen but it will not be made

made by an international body that does not represent the interests of our friend and our ally, veil. -- israel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. clarke: the detroit jobs trust fund will create jobs for detroiters. we definitely need it. metro detroit has lost more jobs in the last 10 years than any metropolitan area in the country, but as the fighting spirit of the detroit tigers and the detroit lions demonstrates, we've got to fight to help this country compete and win any battle for jobs around the world. so my message is this -- you want to create more manufacturing jobs here in the u.s.? then invest in detroit. i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. the gentleman from texas. mr. poe: i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore:

without objection. mr. poe: mr. speaker, nasa's plans to send a shuttle enterprise to new york city is a place that has no connection with nasa. in their sales pitch for the shuttle, the intripped museum had a picture of the orbiter proudly displayed on the hudson river. now in a bait and switch move, they want to move this piece of space history next to a bagel joint, a car wash and a strip club to supposedly butteify the area. the shuttle should not be used as part of an urban renewal project. it needs to be sent to houston, u.s.a. the first word was houston, not new york city. and placing the shuttle in new york city is like placing the statue of liberty in omaha, nebraska. and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from new york. >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> i come before the house, mr. speaker to call for the immediate implementation of the pending aviation safety rule on preventing pilot fatigue. in february of 2009 continental connection flight 3407 crashed in my community of western new york. mr. higgins: it brought to light serious deficiencies in federal aviation standards including our rules to prevent pilot fatigue. congress passed legislation to reform these rules. yet, despite broad congressional support, it is more than two months overdue. yesterday 102 of my colleagues and i sent a letter to the administration urging implementation of these reforms. mr. speaker, the old policies still in place does not prevent fatigue or protect the traveling public.

we must implement the overly far teeing rule. and i yield back -- fatigue rule. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. stearns: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. stearns: although we have achieved the american dream today, some face unfairness in the workplace under a provision that allows employers to pay workers with disabilities less than the federal minimum wage. protection for disabled workers were excluded in the fair labors act and the mistaken belief that they would not be as productive as other workers. that is why i have offered the fair wages for workers with disability act, along with my good colleague, congressman bishop of new york. this legislation would phase out the provision in the fair labor act that allows subminimum wage for disabled

workers. it is deplorable, wrong in america that these not-for-profit centers would hire people with disabilities, including the visually impaired, and pay them less than $1 an hour. workers with disabilities contribute to our economy and to our society, and they deserve equal pay for equal work. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from texas. >> yes, i'd like to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. green: mr. speaker, it's time for this house to act on the american jobs act. mr. speaker, it not only makes good sense, it makes dollars and cents for businesses. businesses that hire persons who've been looking for work for more than six months will get a $4,000 tax credit. if that person happens to be a veteran, it becomes $5,600. if that veteran happens to have a disability that is service

connected, it becomes $9,600. it's time to act on the american jobs act. it makes good sense. it also makes good dollars and cents for business. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from pennsylvania. >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. >> i can't believe you guys put yourself behind the eight ball. that's what my football coaches used to say whenever our team botched a play. as we mark 888 days since the senate has passed a budget, i'd like to say to our friends over in the senate, i can't believe you folks have put the american people behind the 8-ball. without a long-term budget, you can't run a business, you can't run family finances and you sure as heck can't run a government. passing a budget is the responsibilities that the congress has and the senate leadership has take eck a knee.

leadership is mott about sitting on the sidelines, it's about having the courage to run the play. we are calling on senator reid to pass the budget. pass the pro-growth bills and help america get behind the 8-ball. we have waited 888 days to see a budget come out of the senate. while the senate has taken its good old time the american people are taking it on the chin. with constant threats of shutdowns over continuing resolutions, we've had enough. mr. reid, please do your job. pass the budget. thank you, sir. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will remind members to direct their remarks to the chair. the gentleman from north carolina. mr. butterfield: i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. butterfield: thank you, mr. speaker. it is very disappointing to me that the gentleman from south carolina a few moments ago, mr. wilson, took north carolina governor, governor perdue's words completely out of context. every day the governor is urging this congress to work in a bipartisan manner to create

jobs by passing the american jobs act. we need, mr. speaker, to help create jobs. we need to help job creators by offering new tax cuts that insent the hiring of workers and cut payroll taxes. the tax cuts that president obama's american jobs act will save employees $50,000 a year and give them an additional $1,500 per year each in take-home pay. it is real money. it equates to real job growth in the near term. the american jobs act is more than tax cuts. investment in education and infrastructure will increase long-term growth. i urge this body to take up the whole american jobs act, not cherry pick its part without delay so that the small businesses of america can continue to grow and hire, leading us into prosperity. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kansas. >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore:

without objection, so ordered. >> mr. speaker, it's time to put america back to work again and that's why i rise today to lend my voice in support of the three pending free trade agreements that the president has submitted to congress. at a time when 13.9 million americans are looking for work, these bipartisan, commonsense rules is what this congress should be focused. mr. yoder: it's estimated that these could create hundreds of thousands of jobs in the united states and increase american exports by tens of billions of dollars a year. this means real jobs in the third district of congress where exports are a major component of our economy accounting for $10 billion in economic activity and supporting 30,000 jobs. mr. speaker, americans are tired of partisanship and they're looking for solutions to our economic challenges. today, let's come together, pass these trade agreements and let's get kansas and all of america working again. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. yarmuth: i ask permission

to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. yarmuth: mr. speaker, the american jobs act has been presented to the american people, but in this house doesn't sound like it's going to get much of a hearing. republican leadership has called it dead and has called it a partisan piece of legislation. well, i got some evidence that shows it's not really that partisan. as a matter of fact, we sent out a survey to over 4,000 louisvillians asking for their opinions on the provisions of the american jobs act. the amount of support was astounding. 80% wants to spend $50 billion to improve our infrastructure. 76% want to cut payroll taxes for every worker. 77% to cut the payroll tax for businesses. 73% allowing businesses to write off 100% of new investments, a republican proposal. 79% want to provide a tax credit for hiring americans' veterans. now, the only thing that's partisan about the american jobs act is the republicans' attitude about it.

and it is time to pass this act to create a new future for the american people and a better american economy. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia. >> i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> mr. speaker, how many different jobs are to be created if americans had more snakes? mr. connolly: venom specialists, mongoose peddler? i only ask because in the face of stagnating job growth, republican leadership in the house oversight committee actually recommended relaxing restrictions on exotic snake sales to create jobs. apparently in the face of ongoing unemployment, the one job that they can create is snake oil salesman. in contrast, president obama's jobs proposal takes a page out of dwight d. eisenhower, putting americans back to work. it includes infrastructure investment to create jobs.

the republican proposals cuts businesses taxes to incentivizing the hiring of the private sector and cuts payroll taxes to spur economic demand. these bipartisan policies have been successful in the past. the american people need real jobs, mr. speaker, not snake charmers. and i ask that my colleagues to support real proposals like the american jobs act. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentlelady from california. mrs. capps: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mrs. capps: mr. speaker, i rise to express my deep concern over the labor-h.h.s.-education appropriations draft proposed last week by the majority. not only did this action circumvent the procedures of the house, the bill is misguided and dangerous for our nation's family and economy. the draft eliminates the title 10 family planning program. blocks funds for evidence-based

sex education program to instead spend them on programs proven ineffective and discriminatory and threatens to shut down the government over planned parenthood. it harms our work force by slashing the national health service corps program by 55% and making steep reductions to the community health center program. in a way, americorps programs that not only provide jobs but also critical low-cost services to our families and our seniors. the list goes on. but the theme is the same we've seen all year. the majority is more interested in putting ideology over common sense and partisanship over people's needs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: jeaths. the gentleman from maryland. -- the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from maryland. ms. edwards: i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. edwards: thank you, mr. speaker. the other side has been in the majority over 39 weeks and has

not passed a single legislation to create jobs or help small businesses and now they reject out of hand commonsense legislation in the american jobs act to help small business owners who are responsible for creating 70% of the jobs in this country. last week i visited with small business owners like susan bishop, the owner of jaha hair studios. she has been in business 16 years, eight employees and found it impossible to get a $30,000 credit extension to meet payroll from a bank she's done business with for 16 years. she wants to expand her business, to hire others, to train others and can't do it but could with the american jobs act. constituents, owners of kiva cafe. they told me they would actually hire someone if they could get the tax credits available in the american jobs act. so why aren't we doing it? doing it for other small businesses throughout my congressional district? these are real job creators. it's time for this to be our top priority, pass the american

jobs act, get america back to work. it's time for the majority to act. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from virginia. >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. moran: mr. speaker, i rise to speak for the three bilateral trade agreements which the president submitted to the congress yesterday. . i applaud the administration on the revisions to these agreements which will improve market access in korea, transparency in panama, and labor rights in colombia. through their hard work our trade negotiators, led by ambassador kirk, have made real and significant improvements to these agreements that passage is long overdue. while political negotiations over previously uncontroversial trade adjustment assistance programs have dragged on here in washington, american businesses have been losing market share in these three countries. for example, in the first month after the european union, south

korea's free trade agreement went into effect just last month in july, e.u. exports to south korea increased 36% over the year before. meanwhile u.s. market share has been steadily declining from 21% 10 years ago to 9% today. colombia has implemented trade acards with its neighbors and canada and soon with the european union, but u.s. exporters still face an average of 9% in tariffs. these trade agreements need to be passed to create jobs. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from hawaii. >> i unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. hanabusa: mr. speaker, we speak of jobs, both sides of the aisle speak of jobs, and we wonder, why is it that jobs are not being created? it is because the public has no confidence in any of us. so let's start to look seriously at the jobs bill that we have before us, and that is

the president's american jobs act. and let's look at specifics within that. we speak generically, but let's see how it really affects people and let's look how it affects the one group of people we all say we want to help, the veterans. when i was home, we went to the opening for the u.s. vets. it was to implement the president's plan that we will end vets' homelessness by the year 2015. we also know an integral part of that is jobs. look at what his act produces. returning tax considered as read its of up to $5,600 if you hire unemployed vet. wounded warriors tax credit up to $9,600 if you hired a disabled veteran. isn't it time for us to just stop all of this and start to focus on what we need to do? create the jobs for the people who need it. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, by direction of

the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 419 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 78, house resolution 419, resolved, that at any time after the adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 2681, to provide additional time for the administrator of the environmental protection agency to issue achievable standards for cement manufacturing facilities, and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce. after general debate, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment

under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on energy and commerce now printed in the bill. the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waved. no amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those received for printing in the organization of the congressional record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule 18 in a daily issue dated october 4, 2011, or earlier, and except pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate. each amendment so received may be offered only by the member who caused it to be printed or a designee and shall be considered as read if printed. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment, the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments and may have been adopted. any member may demand a separate vote in the house on any amendment adopted in the committee of the whole to the bill or to the committee

amendment in the nature of a sub tute. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. section 2, at any time after the adoption of this resolution, the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 2250, to provide additional time for the administrator of the environmental protection agency to issue achievable standards for industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers, process heaters, and incinerators, and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on energy and commerce. after general debate, the bill

shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on energy and commerce now printed in the bill. the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. all points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute are waived. no amendment to the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those received for printing in the portion of the congressional record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule 18 in a daily issue dated october 4, 2011, or earlier, and except pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate. each amendment so received may be offered only by the member who caused it to be printed or a designee and shall be considered as read if printed. at the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment, the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted.

any member may demand a separate vote in the house on any amendment adopted in the committee of the whole to the bill or to the committee amendment in the of a substitute. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida, mr. nugent, is recognized for one hour. mr. nugent: mr. speaker, for the purpose of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from florida, mr. hastings, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. nugent: during consideration of this resolution all time yielded is for purpose of debate only. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks . the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. nugent: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of house res. 419. the rule provides for consideration of two separate but related bills. h.r. 2250, the e.p.a. regulator

relief act of 2011, and h.r. 2681, the cement sector regulator relief act of 2011. i'm proud to sponsor this rule which provides for a modified open amendment process with a preprinting requirement. this modified open rule means that any member, republican or democrat, with any germane amendment, that complies with the other rules of the house, will have the opportunity to debate that issue. it's another example of the republican majority's continued commitment to transparency. mr. speaker, since coming to this body back in january, my priority has been to create an environment where american workers can prosper. in my home district, unemployment hovers around 13%. i don't doubt the sad statistic is part of the reason that vice president biden is in my district today. talking up the president's

so-called american jobs act. unfortunately for thousands of people looking for work, in florida's fifth congressional district, they can't afford for the president and vice president to just keep talking about it. they need actions not promises. they need to actually break down the barriers that have preventing -- are preventing job creators and employers from creating new jobs. every week when i go home i meet with small business owners. and to get their input on what they need to start hiring again. they always tell me the same three things, we need the -- demand from customers, loans aren't as easy to come by as they were prior to the recession. and they have no idea what to expect from washington as relates to regulation and taxes. washington can't directly control the first two things, but can absolutely take care of the third. one of the businesses when we

did a balanced budget amendment rally in dade city, one of the small business owners stood up and said, what we need is certainty from the federal government. we need certainty that what our taxes are going to be and what regulations are going to be. he talked about the fact that regulations change on a moment's notice based upon whims of the government. he used to plan three to five years out in regards to what their business plan was going to do. what their hiring process was going to be. today they are lucky if they can plan 90 days based upon the uncertainty. and so long as 2/3 of the americans in this country think that we are on the wrong track, they are going to stay hungered -- hunkered down, waiting for signs that things are improving. the american people need to believe that we are putting this economy back on track, back towards growth and prosperity, and you do that

through leadership. there are currently 219 regulations under consideration . each of those regulations separately will cost us $100 million. that's $21.9 billion in increased regulations on businesses today that are already crushed because they can't compete. what's more, there's over 4,226 new regulations in the hopper. with that many regulations costing that much money hanging over their heads, how on earth can we expect small businesses to actually create jobs? you know, today in the house we have the ability to address some of these executive rules all promulgated by the e.p.a. those rules collectively known as boiler mact, cement mact put thousands of jobs in my

district in jeopardy. 7 for the life of me -- for the life of me i can't understand how the vice president can stand up in front of citizens in land-of-lakes, florida, talk about job creation with a straight face. when the obama administration's actively pursuing regulations like boiler mact and cement mact. in my district alone, in my district alone cement mact rule could cost up to 200 cement manufacturing jobs. not adding into the total of jobs that are going to be lost on the associated industries that move it, sell it, and use it. additionally, numerous groups and industries have made it clear that boiler mact regulations will cost them hundreds of millions of dollars, and will put many of their employees in the unemployment line. and yet the president ignores these regulations and keeps

talking about doubling down on a second stimulus. following the failed first stimulus package. here we are today doing something to actually save jobs not just talking about it. one of the very first actions i took as a member of the congress was invite the e.p.a. to come to my office and explain to me their finalized rule in respect to portland cement manufacturing that goes on in my district. you know they said to me, we understand it's not without a challenge to the industry. i may not have been here long but i know washington doublespeak when i hear well, it's not about additional challenges to that industry. it's not just the cement mact that's not without challenge, mr. speaker, you know my colleague, mr. hastings, wrote a letter to the e.p.a. about two months ago and i commend him for this letter.

in it he says, the boiler mact rule alone can impose tens of billions, that's billions, of dollars in capital costs at thousands of facilities across this country. my colleague from florida asked the e.p.a. to consider more flexible approach that could prevent severe job losses in billions of dollars in unnecessary regulatory cost. in florida alone, boiler mact will affect at least 43 boilers requiring $530 million in retrofits. i just heard from florida sugar industry, they estimate boiler mact for their compliance alone will cost $350 million in cost untold jobs. i heard from the pulp and paper workers who they may need to lay off 87,000 workers if this boiler mact regulation goes

into place. i have heard from timber producers in my district that recently been hurt because u.s. plywood products producers have had to close because of lack of demand. and now they are fearful they may have to deal with the double whammy that boiler mact is going to do in regards to putting businesses out of work and close them down. . 12:45 p.m. you know, representative hastings in his letter to e. e.p.a. said this, i know this can sustain both environment and jobs. i believe these bills, h.r. 2250 and h.r. 2681, meet that balanced and makes that balancing possible. these bills don't completely eliminate clean air emission

regulations for boilers and incinerators but what they do is require the agency to create regulation that take achievable science into account. they give effective industry time to comply. in some they make the e.p.a. think about the american work force. mr. speaker, in an environment where job creation is a key, i don't see how we can't support that. with that i encourage my colleagues to vote yes on the rule and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserve. the gentleman from florida, mr. hastings. mr. hastings: thank you very much, mr. speaker, and i thank my friend, colleague and fellow floridian for yielding the time. i rise today in opposition to the rule for h.r. 2250. in my considered opinion both

these bills is yet another effort by the republican leadership to demonize the environmental protection agency while doing nothing to create jobs for the millions of americans who are unemployed. my colleague, mr. nugent, my friend cited to the letter, the authors being walter, robert, g.k. butterfield and john shimkus. we expressed ourselves -- i was not the author of the same. i would have and i do not deny any of its particulars, specifically the fact there should be flexible approaches to address the diversity of boiler operation, sectors in fuels that could prevent severe job loss. i would remind my friend that

the measure that we were speaking of is under a stay and therefore the implementation of the provision will continue, i believe, to allow for the needed flexibility. and i think you referred, and i refer again to the portion of the joint bipartisan letter. as e.p.a. turns to developing a final boiler makt rule -- mind you this is of august of this year -- we hope you will carefully consider sustainable approaches that protect the environment and public health while fostering economic recovery and jobs within the bounds of the law. and that's precisely what i signed on to and stand by and i don't believe it's inconsistent with anything that my friend

pointed out, nor did he suggest it would be inconsistent. but i did also hear my friend talk about washington doublesby and i distinctly heard him refer to what is now kind of perpetuated itself inside this beltway and that is the statement that was made earlier by the distinguished speaker of the house of representatives that at this moment the executive branch has 219 rules that will cost our economy at least $100 million. that means under the current washington agenda our economy is poised to take a hit from government of at least $100 million. i would ask my colleague to not follow on that pattern. otherwise you get caught in the washington beltway doubles

speak and the better proof allows for an analysis that was done by "the washington post" -- and i'm not a follower, necessarily, of "the washington post's" fact checker but so far i have not heard anyone reference them when they do give people -- they give pinocchios of when something is not the truth. it's either one pinocchio, two, three. as it turns out what "the washington post" said following the speaker's comments of -- that you have used here today, my dear friend, is that mr. boehner left the distinct impression that 219 new regulations were hanging like over the u.s. economy but it turns out the number of potential regulations is inflated as well as the potential impact. overall his statement contained significant factual errors and

they give it three pinocchios and i would urge that you not try to earn these pinocchios that they are talking about and let's try to get the facts straight. just last week we were having this very same discussion about a bill that made it easier for power plants to emit harmful mercury and other toxic pollutants into the air. today, we're talking about letting industrial boilers and cement kilns do the same thing. i asked why do certain ones follow some and others can't? i am puzzled by that. i also asked last night how it is we don't know what the rules are going to look like that we would be smything down, if there was such a word, the rule? mr. speaker, we are judged by what we do and not by what we say. my friends on the other side of the aisle continues to do is

call up bills that are shortsighted and undermine our ability to maintain the public health and collegeliness of our air and water. bills like these that destroy regulations protecting the air we breathe and water we drink have the same consequences regardless of intent. republicans cannot close their eyes to these effects and plead good intention. i assure you these effects are severe. mercury is a powerful neuro toxin that does in fact hinder brain development in children. other tocks ill metals, getting a path under these bills, are arsenic, chromium and lead which are known to cause cancer and birth defects. despite these facts, my friends on the other side cling to their anti-regulatory dogma

with fanatical fervor. i had a friend say to me last night that some people have a conscience and brain and others just think about dollar signs. and i feel that my colleagues who have brains, i believe have consciences, seem to place the dollar sign ahead of many of the practical matters that would benefit society. this government rhetoric has gone so far to leave my colleagues on the other side astray of the protocalls laid out by majority leader cantor. in the third protocol laid out in his legislative protocols for the 112th congress leader cantor writes, and i quote him, any bill or joint resolution authorizing discretionary appropriations shall specify the actual amount of funds being authorized.

authorizations shall not utilize terms such as, quote, such sums as may be necessary, unquote, or similar language that fails to specify the actual amount of funding being authorized. yet, neither of these bills specifies how much money is authorized for implementation of the bill leaving the cost a mystery. furthermore, ambiguous language in these bills will create legal uncertainty and ensure litigation. and since these bills don't specify how much they cost, neither bill contains an offset for the cost. these bills also defy leader cantor's fourth protocol that we know around here as cut-go. there will be a real cost for the e.p.a. to take on another lengthy rule creaks procession, but -- creation process, but my friends on the other side have avoided this contradiction.

mr. speaker, these bills are not just bureaucratic fighting. they will have real and measurable effects. according to e.p.a.'s analysis, h.r. 2250 would result in a significant number of premature deaths, a significant number of additional heart attacks, and considerable numbers, more than 100,000 additional asthma attacks that otherwise could have been avoided. likewise, h.r. 2681 would cause tens of thousands of adverse health effects including the premature deaths that are suspected and heart attacks and additional asthma attacks that otherwise could have been avoided. the e.p.a. numbers is i don't think e.p.a. or anybody else has the prerogative to make a

decision about how many people are going to die at a certain time. and that said, it does not mean, however, that one person is not going to die. and it does not mean that one person is not going to have asthma. and my position is one death could be avoided is too many and one asthma attack, if you've been around children who have it, is too many if they could be avoided. in light of these estimates, the bills appear to be nothing more than another attempt to purge any government intervention related to keeping our air clean and environment safe. consider that these regulations, the republicans say are destroying jobs, have not even gone into effect. the boiler mact rule dealing with industrial boilers as i, along with my colleagues to e.p.a., are currently in an

administrative stay while the e.p.a. reviews industry provided data. and that's why we sent the letter during that period of time to ask them to please consider the diversity as i continue to do of boilermakers in this country. we don't even know what the rules are going to look like yet, and yet the republican gut reaction is to oppose them or consider that the cement rules have been finalized for a year already. most cement plants are already in compliance, and those plants that aren't are working with the e.p.a. to get in compliance. mr. speaker, based on what i've seen by the republican-led congress, it's clear to me -- it's clear that they have no intention of using their power to create jobs.

i urge my colleagues, my friends say that the president's administration is not about the business with the so-called he said job creation act. i don't know whether it would create a single job or not, but we won't know until it passes. the agenda that's laid out is an agenda that will attack the e.p.a. as if they are some horror show here in this country and not an agenda, as you heard in the one minutes this morning and as you heard from the democratic leadership repeated us, bring us the jobs act, put it on the floor, let it be debated under an open rule and do what's necessary for us to create jobs. the history of the clean air act shows that its benefits, longer lives, healthier kids, greater work force,

productivity and ecosystem outweighs the costs by more than 30-1. and i continue to remind my friends that the clean air act was implemented under the richard nixon administration and has been in existence for 40 years and this country has experienced ups and downs during that period of time insofar as the economy is concerned. and said regulations hasn't caused all of the economy to collapse. otherwise during the period when speaker gingrich and president clinton and those of us that were here to balance the budget, we wouldn't have been able to do it if the clean air act was all that bad as you all are pointing out in your continuous attack against the e.p.a. and in the since since the act was passed, air pollution -- time since the act was passed, air pollution has been reduced by more 60% while the gross domestic product of the united domestic product of the united states grew by more than