politician. the offer up reasons all the time -- they offer up reasons all-time. host: are you optimistic the super committee can come up with something? guest: the super committee is a way of the congress delegating authority that has in general to a few of its members in particular. it runs into the same problems -- i think the super committee probably will propose some things. it will be a combination of kicking the can down the road together with some cuts in spending. it is probably better than nothing. i don't think we can expect them to settle problems that congress as a whole cannot solve. this has to be worked out by the public in an election. host: what bills are you going

to be watching on the floor? guest: i think whatever comes out of the super committee will be very important. the question of how the balanced budget amendment is with the congress will be interesting to watch. host: we talked about free markets and the political system. women not have time to go into the scientific method -- women at halftime -- we might not have time. very interesting story. "national review" - what is constitutional conservatism. thank you. pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the

house of january 5, 2011, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour debate. the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip limited to five minutes each but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. at this time the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. shimkus, for five minutes. mr. shimkus: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. shimkus: thank you, mr. speaker. in today's reuters report, secretary of state hillary clinton wednesday urged clinton administrationants to the south china sea not to resort to intimidation to push their cause in oil rich waters ahead of the summit. why are we concerned about crude oil in dangerous places of the world? it's because we do not have

north american energy security. hence the whole keystone x.l. pipeline debate. we have good news on that front. two days ago as in lincoln, nebraska, another reuters article said nebraska and transcanada corporation agreed on monday to find a new route for the stalled keystone x.l. pipeline that would steer clear of environmentally sensitive lands in the state. why is that important? energy security. expediting the permitting process, 20,000 new jobs immediately. private capital. caterpillar mining trucks. refinery. if you live in the midwest states of missouri, illinois, indiana, ohio, and michigan this oil goes directly to refineries in that which decreases the reliance on imported crude oil and makes us safe and creates good jobs. keystone x.l. is a no-brainer. the administration needs to get off the dime and move the process. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the

balance of his time. at this time the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. mr. blumenauer: last december an item caught my eye in the "harper's" index. the rank of baked goods, pizza, and soda as sources of calories for american children. drumroll, please. number one, number two, number three. that's our children get most of their calories first from baked goods, then from pizza, then from soda. no wonder we have a national epidemic of obesity for our children with lifetime health care consequences starting with diabetes and then heart disease. it's why the military is concerned that one in four, only one in four, young people qualifies for military service with obesity being a major factor in that disqualification. i salute first lady michelle

obama in her efforts to spotlight healthy eating to help families give their children more nutritious choices. but we should start with what we are feeding three -- 31.6 million children in our schools. the administration has taken some small but important steps with the federal partnership of this largest food program in the country to refine what the standards are for delivering this important service to our children. well, the battle has taken a new turn where congress is poised to intervene to make sure that pizza continues to count as a vegetable and that we protect more french fries on the tray. well, overturning this simple commonsense adjustment for rules, which food nutrition

experts and child advocates strongly support, is going to be buried in the agriculture appropriation bill coming forward. the people who defend inflicting this on our children cite issues of cost, waste, and nutrition. you don't need calorie laden pizza crust to deliver nutrients. and waste is not a product of giving people healthy choyses. i invite anybody to come with, visit abernathy school in portland, oregon, where parents, students, and faculty have combined to have an i know veterans dayive -- an innovative food program where kids grow the food themselves, they prepare it, study t. they are healthier and happyier. come to the university of portland where bon appetit, an innovative food service supplier

has by providing more choices and healthier choices has cut waste 70%. the cost argument is the most bogus. we are talking arguably about perhaps as much as 14 cents a meal. less than $1.4 billion for a year. that is less than congress has decided that it will pay brazilian cotton farmers because we don't have the gumption to end illegal cotton subsidies to american farmers. we could produce $25 to $30 billion in savings from direct payments, usually to large agribusiness entrants, or if we stop the obscene process of giving more to crop insurance agents that to -- than to farmers, reform crop insurance, we could yield another $8 billion to $12 billion. this is entirely within our

capacity. if the house goes along with this travesty, shame on us. the need to protect our children's health has never been clearer. the costs have never been manageable. indeed this will more than pay for itself in lifetime costs of health, necessary health damage and shortened lives. the ketchup as vegetable debacle of the reagan era will look tame and sane by comparison. i strongly urge the house to reject this ill-advised initiative. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new jersey, mr. lance. for five minutes. mr. lance: thank you, mr. speaker. as of november 14, 2011, the

united states national debt is $14.973 trillion. according to the department of the treshry. with pend -- treasury. with pending security auctions this month, it is inevitable that the national debt will reach the unprecedented level of $15 trillion in the coming weeks. when the national debt reaches $15 trillion, it means that u.s. debt to g.o.p. -- g.d.p. ratio will reach 99.7% of our debt. this is $47,900 for every living american. since president obama took office in 2009, the debt has $4.3 trillion. the last 50 years the federal government has only managed to balance its budget five times. most recently with president clinton, a democrat, and republican control of the united states house of representatives

and of the senate. washington now borrows approximately 40% of every dollar it spends. foreign investors hold half of our nation's debt. not only from china but from japan, great britain, saudi arabia, and other places as well. admiral mullen, the recently retired chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, has rightly called the national debt the single biggest threat to our national security. while we have made significant strides in reducing the cost of government over the past few months, much more is needed to be done. the primary focus of this congress and new leadership has been to restore fiscal sanity and fiscal restraint to the federal government. we must remember that the money in the treasury is not our money but it is the people's money, and we are charged with being good stewards of that money. there's only one way to ensure that future congresses and presidents regardless of party are unable to return to the

reckless out-of-control spending of the past. that is to pass a balanced budget amendment to the united states constitution. this week congress will vote on a balanced budget amendment to the constitution for the first time in 16 years. in 1995 following passage by the house of representatives, the united states senate came within one vote of sending a version of the balanced budget amendment to the states for ratification. since then our total national debt has almost tripled. today's proposal is nearly identical with the one that passed the house of representatives with 72 democratic votes in 1995. amending our constitution should not be taken lightly. i will support the balanced budget amendment because i believe it is the right thing to do to help get our nation's fiscal house in order. i would have preferred that the balanced budget amendment include a spending cap, but we need democratic members to achieve the necessary 2/3

majority required for a constitutional amendment to be sent to the states for ratification. that is why the amendment we will be considering almost mirrors the 1995 text. before coming to congress i served in the new jersey state legislature where i successfully sought reforms to ensure that our state government was responsible with the people's money. in 2008 the people of new jersey passed my state constitutional amendment to require voter approval for issuance of state borrowing. i'm proud to be able to do my part here in washington as well. most states, including new jersey, are required to balance their states' budgets. if the federal government continues to spend what it does not have, the balanced budget amendment would provide a much needed safeguard to restrict future spending. as someone who tries to be a student of american history, i know that a balanced budget amendment is not a new idea. thomas jefferson was a strong proponent of the idea. he said, i wish it were possible

to obtain a single amendment to the constitution. i would be willing to depend on that alone for the reduction of the administration of our government. he was referring to a balanced budget amendment. those were wise words when spoken and they are wise words today. passing a balanced budget amendment would also help move us closer to much needed economic certainty that our nation desperately needs to boost the economy and to help create jobs. when i was a boy and young man, the fundamental issue confronting the nation was the threat of the soviet union and international communism. the focus of evil in the modern world, as president reagan said. the fundamental issue confronting the nation in the 21st century is fiscal responsibility. will our children live in a diminished america? will the promise of america that each generation does better than the generation before it continue to exist? will we continue to lead the world or will leadership pass to china or india or to some other

place? this is the great issue confronting the people of the united states and it's the great issue confronting us here in congress. let us get our fiscal house in order. let's pass a balanced budget amendment to the constitution of the united states. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. quigley, for five minutes. mr. quigley: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, today i rise with a heavy heart to honor and recognize marine lance corporal nicholas daniels. lance corporal daniels of illinois was tragically killed november 5 at the age of 25 while on patrol in the helmund province of afghanistan. i want to pass on my deepest condolences to his family and those who knew him and share with them the thanks of a grateful nation. nick attended elmwood elementary school and graduated from saint patrick high school in tour where he was an all conference linebacker in football.

mr. daniels after going back to saint pats to coach football joined the marines in 2010 to help achieve his gole of becoming a police officer. nick was well-known and respected throughout the saint pats community. he was a very funny, lighthearted person who would do anything to those around him. not only was nick a dedicated coach, but most importantly to him he was a loving son and grand son, an incredible mentor to his younger sister and brothers, and loving and devoted fiance. i have been told that nick poured his heart into everything he did and always wanted to make sure his friends and family were taken care of. a decorated marine receiving multiple citations and role mod until his community, he was and will remain a shining example, the best this country has to offer. . . we can never repay nick or his family for what he's given to this country. as i thought about what to say

today, i realized the adequacy of words and any such effort. i was realized that this feeling was shared by an american president who attempted to console a family that had lost five sons in battle during the civil war but he captured the loss as he wrote -- i feel how weak and fruitless must be any word of mine which attempt to tell you about the loss of a loved one. but i can't tell you the consolation that may be found in the thanks to the republic they died to save. i pray our heavenly father may leave only the cherished memory of a loved and lost and the sound pride that must be yours to have laid the cost of freedom. yours very sincerely, abraham lincoln. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr.

mcclintock, for five minutes. mr. mcclintock: thank you, mr. speaker. today, the house will consider h.r. 822, a long overdue measure to assure that states recognize the concealed weapons permits issued by other states. this very simple measure has unleashed a firestorm of protests from the political left. i noted one to one who has not wrote the constitution says it's a lack of constitutional states rights. what nonsense. article 4 of the constitution could not possibly be more clear. full faith and credit shall be given in each state to the public acts, records and jew kirble proceedings of every other state and the congress may by general laws prescribe the manner in which such acts, records should be approved and the effect thereof. it is precisely this article

that requires one state to recognize drivers licenses or birth certificates or arrest warrants issued by another state. without it we are not a union but merely a loose confederation. well, then we're told this is quss and risky to allow honest and law-abiding citizens to have their lawfully issued permits in other states. well, upon what basis do they make this claim? certainly not on any impeercal data. laws that requires the issuance of a concealed weapon permit to any law-abiding citizen has been studied extensively and the vast prepond rance find that the crime rates have fallen in those states after they have adopted such laws. no credible study has ever found that the enactment of such laws has produced an increase in crimes or sue sides or accidental deaths. overall, states with

right-to-carry laws have 22% lower violent crime rates, 46% lower robbery rates and 12% lower aggravated assault rates as compared fought rest of the country. indeed, right-to-carry laws have been so successful that no state has ever rescinded one. well, so if the left can't make a rational case on constitutional grounds or on imperical grounds, what's the problem? i suspect it comes down to what ronald reagan once called, this irreconcilable conflict of those who believe in the sanctity of individual freedom and those who believe in the supremacy of the state. years ago i had the honor to work for the legendary chief of the los angeles police department, ed davis. during his 8 1/2 years as chief of the lapd, crime dropped in los angeles even while during the same period across the rest of the nation it was ballooning by more than 50%.

chief davis founded neighborhood watch. he was an ardent opponent of laws that restrict ownership of firearms by honest citizens. his successful philosophy was predicated on the principle that, as he put it, it's not the responsibility of the police department to enforce the law. that is the job of every citizen. the police department is there to help. as citizens we're an integral part of the laws that we enact. that doesn't mean we act as vigilantes but it does mean that each of us has an unalienable right to fight against predators with whatever force is necessary. if we see a child being molested or a woman being robbed or an old man being beaten, we have a moral responsibility to intervene to the extent that we can. a concealed weapon in the hands of honest and law-abiding citizens makes us all safer. simply knowing that there are

responsible citizens amongst us capable of responding with force is itself a powerful deterrent to crime. that's the well documented experience of every state with the right-to-carry law. but a society in which honest and law-abiding citizens are disarmed by their government is a society in which the gunman is king. this is a truth that ought to be self-evident, but it's lost at the authoritarian left which seeks to concentrate all power in government at the expense of people. perhaps the best test of the self-evident of that truth is illustrated in a full-page newspaper ad that i once saw that offered a cutout sign which in 150-point type said, there are no guns in this house. the cap said, would you post this sign in your front window? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes at this time the gentleman from minnesota, mr. walz. mr. walz: thank you, mr.

speaker. thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to urge and implore my colleagues to support the stock act, the stop trading on congressional knowledge act. i ask also that speaker boehner bring this bill to the floor for a vote immediately. on sunday night on cbs their news program, "60 minutes" highlighted a potential problem of insider trading on capitol hill. unlike all other americans and investors, members of congress and their staff are not held legally responsible for profiting from nonpublic information they gain from their official position serving the public. this is absolutely outrageous and strikes at the heart of the democracy. when i first came to congress and sat down with the author of this bill originally, congressman baird, and he started explaining to me what this was about, i, as most americans, was shocked to believe it wasn't already a bill. why would you allow the breach of trust of the american public

to believe that their member of congress could potentially be trading on information to enrich themselves? it's not the point of is it happening, the point is the potential lies there. at the heart of every relationship is trust. if the trust is violated, everything that comes after that is a moot point. at a time -- and this might be the greatest understatement ever. the american public is understandably frustrated with all the bickering and gridlock here. they don't trust institutions. they don't trust their banker. they don't trust corporations. they don't trust congress. if you thought we can't go lower than a 9% approval rating, just have the people that watched "60 minutes" vote now. it's about restoring the faith and trust in congress and the work of democracy. ronald reagan was right. we heard about president reagan several times today. trust but verify. that's what this piece of

legislation is about. we want to work with speaker boehner, get this bill moving. and let me tell you, it's very simple on what it does. the bill would prohibit insider trading on capitol hill. it will remove loophole and any confusion about what's right, wrong, legal or illegal. no insider trading by members of congress and their staff, period. if you do it you break the law, you'll be held accountable. it's common sense. the stock act would prohibit congressional staff from using nonpublic information obtained through their official duties for person gain and stocks in the commodities market. it would also prohibit individuals and firms who attempt to mind such information from public officials to use it. the bill is simple and short and says this, requires that the s.e.c. and the cftc write rules that back using congressional nonpublic information to make trades. changes the house ethics rules to specifically ban members and staff from using nonpublic

information to make trade. change house disclosure rules to require members and staff who already file financial disclosures to disclose trades of $1,000 or more in a more timely fashion. in addition to the annual disclosures. and it requires political intelligence firms to register like lobbyists. these are people who come to the hill, use their connections, talk to people, try and understand what piece of legislation is moving, what's the potential for a potential government contract and then they go back, sell that information that's given to investors. that breach of trust, that potential to undermine our financial systems is a cancer on the system. it weighs on the american public's trust of their finance, of corporations, of congress and undermines a democracy. these people can still come here but register just like lobbyists. make sure that transparency and the sunshine shines on them.

there is no rule in this institution for even this perception of wrongdoing. every member of congress must be held to a higher standard. it does not infringe upon their rights to legally trade. it doesn't infringe upon their american rights to work hard, be smart, make good investments and profit from that. what it does prohibit is an unfair playing field that penalizes those that play by the rules. and like so many of my colleagues and millions of middle-class americans, i myself, a public school teacher, spent 24 years in the national guard, i fried to do what was -- i tried to do what was right by my family. i tried to play by the rules with the great understanding that the american dream was you play by the rules, you work hard, you will benefit for that. this piece of legislation ensures that the american people know that we as their representative in this sacred house of the people are playing by the exact same rules. not worrying about enriching

ourselves, not worrying about gaming the system and making sure that their needs are put first. and as i said, it's not whether it happens or not. it's whether the perception is there. i urge my colleagues and speaker boehner, move this to the floor and let's vote for it. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. turner, for five minutes. mr. turner: thank you, mr. speaker. all of us heard the stories of human experiments, tortures and mass execution. as the interim of the holocaust museum here in washington says, never again, and others have said, never forget. sadly, we are provided with the powerful reminder that anti-semitism is very much in our midst. 73 years later to the today,

the events of crystal mark, the night of broken glass, were replayed in my district. cars were burned and anti-semetic scralls left on property. we know the consequence of inaction. as was true then as it is today we know that hatred is out there and we are all too familiar with its ability to spread like a cancer. 10 million people died at the hands of the nazis, including six million jews. this indiscriminant murder is beyond comprehension. it's unfathomable. and while hitler and his nazi henchman coordinated this horrific event, they were not alone, and others who aided, abetted and profited from this crime should be held accountable. this morning i will be joining my colleague, ileana ros-lehtinen, chairman of the foreign relations committee, was holding a hearing on two important pieces of legislation

which would make and hold accountable those entities that aided in the holocaust. the holocaust justice act would make the french-owned rail company, sncs, which transported jews in imploring conditions from france to germany, liable for damages. i am proud to be co-sponsor of this bill. for a generation, holocaust victims and survivors had been denied justice through a legal loophole, barring lawsuits against sovereign entities. the rail company has hidden behind this legal veil to escape liability. even though their trans, tracks and employees were used. there's no excuse for any person or entity who played a role in the holocaust. the nurmburg trials were clear, it was not enough that we were following orders, it snot enough to say the company did not engineer the atrocities.

sncf facilitated it and they should be held accountable for their part. german -- chairman ros-lehtinen introduced another measure, which would have beneficiaries of holocaust victims to obtain compensation from insurance companies and policies which were taken by nazi-run governments. this bill would provide a legal forum for victims to have their claims heard which is small compensation for the atrocities of the holocaust so that the words never again are more than just words. . thank you, mr. chairman. i yield my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york, mr. higgins, for five minutes. without objection. so ordered. mr. higgins: mr. speaker, on november 28 a new federal courthouse will open in western new york. located on historic niagara

square, the 10 story structure will be home to the united states court for the western district of new york. the striking profile of the courthouse is a reminder that buffalo's future is connected to its unique architectural heritage. as we draw inspiration for our future from this impressive building, i can think of no name more fitting to grace it than one from our past. that of western new york's overwhelm supreme court justice, robert h. jackson. jackson was born and raised near jamestown, new york. he spent the first 42 years of his life in western new york and for a time lived on johnson park which is in the shadow of the new courthouse. he practiced law at the historic ellicott square building in downtown buffalo. he was a prominent local attorney and in 1934, president roosevelt called him to public service in washington. after stints as assistant

attorney general for tax and antitrust, jackson was appointed u.s. solicitor general. he personally argued more than 30 dayses before the supreme court on which he would later sit. lewis brandeis, who was a supreme court justice at the time, said of jackson that he was so good he should be solicitor general for life. but jackson was son tapped to head the justice department as united states attorney general. he was instrumental in helping president roosevelt formulate america's national security policies as the united states headed toward inevitable involvement in world war ii. in 1941 roosevelt appointed jackson to the united states supreme court. he remains to this day the overwhelm supreme court justice from western new york. he served on the court for 13 terms and took part in several important decisions, none bigger than the landmark brown v. board of education which printed

segregation. justice jackson was known on the court for personally authoring thoughtful and compelling opinions. the leading constitutional scholar called jackson the most piercingly eloquent writer ever to serve on the united states supreme court. in 1945, president truman asked johnson to take a leave from the court to serve as united states chief prosecutor at the international military tribunal. the nuremberg trials. jackson was the chief prosecutor of the nazi war criminals and responsible for achieving consensus among the allies for the trials. some believe the year jackson spent him away from the court cost him the chance to be elevated to chief justice, but jackson argued that nuremberg was the most important work of his life. true to his western new york roots, immediately upon returning from europe, jackson took a train to buffalo to address the university of buffalo's centennial. he spoke eloquently of the

subjects of war, international law, and the need for countries to work together for peace. robert jackson died in 1954 and is buried at maple grove cemetery in new york, not far from his childhood home of the the federal judges, united states attorney of the western district of new york have endorsed the naming of the courthouse in jackson's honor. the chief judge called him the most distinguished jurist and acclaimed legal mind to come out of western new york. and senior judge john kur tip said of jackson, i think we should pick someone from the court family in western new york. i can't think of a better choice. mr. speaker, justice jackson's story is uniquely american and it's uniquely western new york. i will soon introduce legislation to name our new courthouse for robert h. jackson and i invite my colleagues to join to support this effort. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. olson, for five minutes.

mr. olson: mr. speaker, before spending last weekend in hawaii, and now jetting off to australia and indonesia, president obama's crisscrossing our country on his we can't wait for congress to act tour. along the way he found the time to issue executive orders that circumvent the will of congress. his justification for this end run around congress? america can't wait for congress to act to create jobs. if our president was really interested in creating jobs, he would not have caved in to election year politics, which is precisely what he did last

friday when he posit an approval of the proposed keystone x.l. pipeline until well after next fall's election. when completed, the keystone x.l. pipeline would bring nearly one million barrels of oil per day to the united states from canada. support for this pipeline is wide and varied, including major united states labor unions who understand the project will create thousands of american jobs and reduce our reliance on middle earn oil. we'll have greater national security. that's a win-win-win-win for america. there is no dispute that building the pipeline will create 20,000 american construction jobs and spin off over 100,000 indirect jobs in the good old u.s.a. unfortunately, the president is

putting personal political needs before the needs of our working americans. he's blowing an opportunity to ensure a stable oil flow from can country that likes us while creating jobs here in america. the environmental protection agency and the state department have spent extensive time reviewing the attacks of this pipeline. early proposals were revised to address concerns. after years of study a decision was supposed to be made this fall by president obama. apparently it was a tough decision for our president. he had to choose between two groups within his political base. labor unions and jobs, environmental activists, and no jobs. there are times when the american people expect leadership. leadership which requires making

tough decisions. regrettably, last friday our president caved in to environmental and hollywood activists as they surrounded the white house in opposition to the keystone pipeline. he chose to postpone a final decision until january of 2013. his reason? the administration needed to consider alternative routes for the pipeline that avoided ack which first in nebraska. -- aquifers in nebraska. the saga doesn't end there. yesterday, transcanada the builder of the pipeline, directly addressed president obama's concerns by announcing they would reroute the pipeline to avoid the nebraska aquifers. problem solved. american people win, right? no. it took a few hours for the administration to announce that the goal posts were being moved again.

despite proposing a solution to the president's concerns, the administration announced that a final decision will not come until after the presidential election in 2012. the bottom line? president of politics trumped what's best for our nation's economy to recover from the worst recession in our history. america needs a thoughtful leader who places the needs of country over politics. canada has an abundance of energy they want to sell us, but they won't wait forever. and china is a ready customer. canadian prime minister harper recently indicated that with this unnecessary delay canada must increase its efforts to find a partner to ensure it can supply energy outside the united states. and into asia in particular. this pipeline will help american families today.

we need these jobs today. we need this pipeline today. the chicago bears need a punter, the american people need a leader. president obama should be that leader and approve this pipeline today. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. schiff, for five minutes. mr. schiff: mr. speaker, in the waning months of the clinton administration, jayson selleckman, the government economist, produced a memo for the white house that speculated what the effects would be if the united states paid off its national debt by 2012 as many were predicting at the time. the memo which was obtained by n.p.r. under freedom of information act was never released publicly and the events of the ink convening years have render it nothing more than historical curiosity, but its mere existence is both a sfark reminder of what might have been and an acknowledgement that the great majority of the debt was built up during the last administration.

in late 2000 no one could have foreseen the 9/11 attacks or wars that follow. these certainly contributed to the red ink, but provely ga see, pour strategic choices, and political positioning are the real drivers of our budget which was under $6 trillion at the time of president clinton leaving office but is now nearly $15 trillion. in a real estate bubble fueled by too easy credit, and an economy no longer focused on creating and making things here in america and the challenge facing us comes into even more clear focus. in one week, the bicameral supercommittee is due to present its plan to congress to rein in our out-of-control finances and restore responsible stewardship of our economy that prevailed at the end of the clinton administration when government ran surpluses for four straight years. a mere month after the supercommittee presents its plan, just before christmas, we will either bless its work or face the real prospect of paying

full across-the-board cuts beginning in 2013. i have long supported a realistic approach and urged the supercommittee to go big and consider the full range of government spending in making cuts. however i also know that we cannot put our fiscal house in order solely through spending cuts and that the government is going to have to find a way to increase the revenue flowing into the federal teshtreshry. while the choices we will -- treshry. while the choices we will confront will be difficult, they are only the beginning of a process that must result in a new economic paradigm that will guide congress and the administration in the coming years when we'll be forced to adjust to a competitive global environment even as we work to put the economic down turn over the past three years behind us. as the current wave of pessimism surrounding the work of the supercommittee demonstrates, this will not be an easy task nor will it be accomplished quickly. if we are to succeed and success is an imperative, i believe that we'll need a new set of long-term strategies and policies to accomplish five

principles. first, the u.s. is going to have to become a manufacturer again. we should be proud of the many of the world's iconic consumer products like apple iphones for example were designed and developed here, but much of the benefit to our economy is lost because these products are too often manufactured overseas. american workers are not benefiting from the manufacture of apple's category leading smart phone. we need to return to an economy where american workers are involved in the full lifecycle of a product from concept through design and testing and on to manufacture and marketing. to do that i believe that we need to inject some certainty into our corporate tax structure as well as creating a regulatory structure that projects workers, consumers, and the environment but not on a way that's arbitrary or capricious. we need to work on small business remaining the capitalist in this economy. while government cannot change

the central truth about a market economy, we can foster a climate that makes it easier to succeed by ensuring access to capital, targeting tax incentives, by creating a supportive infrastructure, and devising a regulatory framework that offers american business the best chance of success. third, we are in a global war for talent and we must reorient our immigration structure to attract the most promising people from around the world. it is no longer a given that a young indian or chinese entrepreneur will want to move to the u.s. if given the chance. combined with a dice quieting trend that american universities are not producing enough homegrown talent in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. we face a daunting challenge. in coming days i'll be introducing legislation that will make it easier for foreign-born grad in select stem fields to stay in this country by starting a new business here an hiring american workers. fourth, america cannot compete with the developing world in

terms of wages, but a highly skilled work force buttressed by a revitalized world class infrastructure that reduces the time and expense of getting goods to market and fosters innovation, will keep us competitive. that's why i support investments in infrastructure and education that will lay the groundwork for newly competitive america while addressing the current unemployment problem acting as a drag on our economy. . hard work and perseverance will give every american the ability to live comfortably. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. brady, for five minutes. mr. brady: mr. speaker, thank you for letting me talk about family. as an adoptive parent of two

wonderful boys, my wife kathy and i know how blessed an adoptive family is. will and shawn are the light of our lives. they are the gift that gives our lives the purpose and joy we've we never knew before. it's a privilege for me to serve the eighth district of texas but it's a high privilege to be called dad because two women and two difficult circumstances and two different states made the difficult but life-changing choice to give kathy and i the greatest gift of all, a family. this weekend marks the 12th annual national adoption day where judges will open their courts for very several cases and tens of thousands of children to become part of these forever families. in my home state of texas, there are nearly 30,000 children in foster care and half of them could be adopted tomorrow. i hope that every american who has ever thought about sharing

their blessings with a child thinks about these children who just want a seat at a thanksgiving table they can call their own. i ask every american, do you have room for one more at your table? if just one in 500 of the americans who said they'd be open to adopting a foster child did so no foster child would only have the dreams of a forever family, they would have the seat at the thanksgiving day table. right now the average wait for a foster child to find a forever family is over 2 1/2 years. to a child that seems like forever. and thousands age out of the system every year never having found a home. on the greatest nation of god's green earth we can do better by these kids, one by one, town by town. a loving, forever family and home not only makes a powerful difference in the lives of these children, i can promise you the joy and love you get

back will change your family. being an adoptive parent is a gift. every day is a present. the love you share comes back to you because adoption makes families. it made mine. maybe it can make yours as well. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from california, ms. roibled, for five minutes. -- ms. roybal-allard, for five minutes. ms. roybal-allard: a group of stakeholders met in virginia to discuss home birth within the greater context of maternity care in the united states. that meeting marked the first time a multidisciplinary group of maternity care providers, consumers and industry leaders came together to determine what the u.s. maternity care system could do to make home birth the

safest and most positive experience possible for moms and babies. given the significant controversy over the appropriateness of home birth within the groups represented at the summit, the fact that this conversation took place at all is historic. the goal of the meeting was not to debate the rightness or wrongness of home birth but rather to discuss the support, care, consultation, collaboration and referrals necessary to protect moms and babies in all birth settings. according to c.d.c.'s most recent figures, in 2008 approximately 28,500 home births took place in the united states. while this number represents less than 1% of all births in our country, the last available statistics said that between 2004 and 2008 the number of women giving birth at home increased by 22%.

without compromising quality of care, women want and expect to have choices for childbirth, including birth setting. women and families are ill-served when maternity care professionals allow conflict between disciplines to supersede collaboration. the safety of birth in all settings must be the utmost priority. the delegates who met in virginia were charged with finding common ground to move the issue of safe home births beyond professional differences and toward consensus building. the result of their effort was a consensus document released on november 1 of this year. this important document sets out nine essential statements of agreement about the ideal system to promote the safest and most positive birth outcome across all birth settings. while i will be submitting the entire document into the record, i want to highlight the

following key points agreed upon by all the delegates at the summit. first, all childbearing women in all maternity care settings should receive respectful, women-centered care, including opportunities for shared decisionmaking to help each woman make the choices that are right for her. second, this is value able for women, babies and society and appropriate intervention should be based on the best available evidence to achieve optimal outcomes for mothers and babies. third, collaboration within an integrated maternity care system is essential for optimal outcome. and when necessary all women and families planning a birth center at home have a right to a respectful, safe and seamless consultation, referral, transport and transfer of care. fourth, all health professionals who provide maternity care in all settings should have a license that is

based on national certification that includes defined competencies and standards for education and practice. and fifth, in order to foster effective communication and collaboration across all maternity disciplines, all students and practitioners involved in maternity and newborn care must learn about each other's disciplines and maternity care in all settings. additionally, the consensus document calls for medical liability system reform, a process with a collection of patient data and all birth settings, the elimination of disparities of care and increased consumer participation. the home birth consensus summit document is an important first step in protecting all childbearing families across all birth settings. but the discussion must not stopped there. i encourage all professional organizations representing providers of maternity care and

newborn care and all childbirth advocacy group to confirm the statement and commit to working together towards its realization. mothers and babies in this country deserve nothing less. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes at this time mr. duncan for five minutes. mr. duncan: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. duncan: mr. speaker, i rise to pay tribute to a great american who passed away last week, my friend, mel hancock. mel served in this body from 1989 to 1997. he could have been easily re-elected, but he had pledged to serve only eight years and kept his word. mel served the people of southwest missouri with great honor and distinction. he was one of the most downto earth people to ever sit in congress and i can assure everyone that washington never changed mel hancock one bit.

he was one of the most conservative members here and if everyone voted as he did we certainly would not be in the astounding hole we are in today. mel was a very successful small business man. early in his career he was a salesman for international harvester and actually lived in my hometown of naaqsville for a year and a half in 1954 and 1955. i told him once i was glad he moved back to missouri so i could be in congress. of course, it was 33 years later when we both first ran. mel was 59 when first elected and was the oldest freshman of those who were elected in 1988. all the new members very quickly grew to respect and looked up to him. in missouri, mel had started a business installing security cameras in banks. he started with very little, worked very long hours and saw the american dream come true in his own life. he saw that as government grew bigger and bigger it took away more and more of their freedom and really hurt the middle

class and those in small business. he believed that big government really helped only those who worked for the government and very wealthy big government contractors. so he took on the establishment in missouri with what came to be called the hancock amendment. this was an amendment to limit property taxes and he really just started out as one man taking on the government and its contractors. but he won and missouri was a better place for it. the people have more control over their own money. one quick story. i doubt that mel hardly ever went to a november but one night he and i were invited to the world premiere of "air force one" a movie starting harrison ford. it was a hollywood-type opening with bright lights and a long red carpet. most people came in tuxedos and long dresses, many in limousines. at that time, because i did not drive long distances in washington, i drove a very cheap, chocolate brown car i bought used from a rental company. the passenger door made a horrible, very loud sound when

it opened. the attendant opened his door of that little brown car, making loud noise so mel and i could walk in our very ordinary suits down that red carpet. he loved the fact that we were among the very few who had not come in tuxedos and limousines. there's an old saying about being country before country was cool. that was mel. mel was possibly the first tea party person in the best sense of those words many years before there was the tea party of today. mel ran for congress on the slogan of give a mill. when he won he became a gift to this nation and to his people. mel was assigned to the very prestigious ways and means committee. most former members of that committee become lobbyists or highly paid consultants, but it was no surprise to me that when he left he went home to be with his family and the people of missouri and never came back. he was a kind, honest, hardworking american who helped thousands of people. mel hancock loved his wife,

shug, and his children and he loved his country. he made this nation a better place by all that he did in his good life. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. green, for five minutes. mr. green: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, america continues to be the land of the free because america continues to be the home of the brave. i think it most appropriate that this house take up legislation today that will include the hiring heroes act. this legislation is exceedingly important because our brave heroes, our troops go to distant places and they risk their limbs and their lives to

protect great and noble american ideals. they do not ask why. when the clairian call comes, they respond by going to their various assignments and doing their jobs. when they leave home they many times will leave home a wife that is with child. many of their children are born while they are in distant places protecting our great and noble american ideals. they will leave behind them children who are about to take their first steps. they never get to see the first step or hear the first words spoken. when a veteran goes to war, when a troop goes to war, that troop has that family with him or her. a family goes to war not directly but always indirectly

with the troop that goes to war. and they do their job. they have done their job in afghanistan. they have done their job in iraq. and they will continue to do their job, but it is sad to note that of those veterans who have done their jobs in iraq and afghanistan, 12.1% of them are unemployed. this is not a partisan issue. this issue transcends the lines that generally separate us. if they can go to distant places and risk their limbs and their lives for us to do their jobs for us, we have to provide jobs for them when they come home. this is about doing the right thing for people who answer the clairian call to serve without hesitation, reservation or equivocation. they merit jobs when they come

home. this this is why i'm proud that this house will take up legislation that will accord tax credits to businesses that hire our veterans. if a business hires a veteran that has been unemployed for four weeks, there's a $2,400 tax credit available. if that veteran has been unemployed for six months, there is a $5,600 tax credit that's available. . if the unemployed veteran has been unemployed for six months and has a service connected disability, there is a $9,600 tax credit available to the business. this is the business of america putting our veterans to work. this piece of legislation merits our consideration for other reasons as well. the legislation will allow approximately 100,000 veterans of wars of other everrass -- eras to have help with job

training and other programs. this piece of legislation is the least a grateful nation can do for those who answer the clarion call to serve in distant places. i'm honored to say i will vote for the legislation. i believe in our country. i believe in the american service people. the troops that go to distant places. i want to make sure that they have every opportunity to recapture what they have lost when they have left their homes, left their jobs for years on end. if they could leave their jobs here an make sacrifices for us, we've got to make sacrifices here so that they can have jobs when they return home. america will continue to be the land of the free as long as we continue to make sure that we have jobs for those who are brave enough to serve us in distant places. god bless america. god bless our troops.

and i yield back the balance of my time. search the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. neugebauer, for five minutes. mr. neugebauer: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today to honor and remember the honorable judge "rusty" glad a great man. tireless public servant, and advocate for the homeless. larry ladd passed away friday, september 30, 2011, and he will be missed by all who knew him. i know the legacy he leaves behind will not soon be forgotten by his family, his friends, or his community and especially irene and the children. rusty was born in breckenridge, t.b., august 8, 1952 as the oldest son of a cotton beginner. graduated from lubbock christian college in 1975 with a gree in biblical studies and joined the police force in 1977. in 1988 he graduated from texas

tech law school and started his own practice as a defense attorney in dallas. he moved back as a prosecutor in amarillo in plain view, and he was deputy assistant attorney in the lubbock county office. in 1999 he assumed the bench of the court of law number one. when he took the bench he said i'm a new judge and in taking the bench, i'm going to be able to fulfill my oath to defend the laws of the state in a fair and impartial way. he was true to his word. serving fairly and impartially, compassionate when possible, you firm when necessary. rusty showed his kindness not only in the courtroom but also on the streets of lubbock. he opened his heart to the homeless in the lubbock community. serving on the homeless committee of the lubbock city council since 2010, and volunteering through carpenter's church. rusty dedicated his time and effort to serving the poor and

marginalized. the thing about homeless person misses the most is not the food and shelter, it's the genuine relationship with somebody that's got a stable life going on. his christ-like attitude toward the poor is inspiring and i hope and pray we can continue the selfless acts he initiated. mr. speaker, please join me in extending my sincere thanks to the judge for leaving this world a better place than he found it. i'm truly honored to recognize his accomplishments. he will serm be missed but he will never be forgotten by those who knew him and he touched their lives. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from nevada, ms. berkley, for five minutes. ms. berkley: mr. speaker, i rise today to express my strong support for the emergency unemployment compensation extension act of 2011. this legislation will extend unemployment insurance one

additional year preventing six million people across our nation and thousands of nevadans from losing their unemployment benefits. this is especially important in my home state of nevada which continues to struggle with the highest unemployment rate in the nation. nevada's unemployed need good paying jobs that can't be shipped overseas, and that's why i'm focused like a laser on creating clean energy jobs and cracking down on the chinese government's unfair trade practices that are cheating nevadans out of thousands of good paying jobs. but nevadans also need relief in their job search. what they don't need is name-calling. unfortunately that's what they are getting in washington. in fact. one ever our representatives had the nerve to suggest that unemployment insurance is creating a nation of hobeos. hobeos? mr. speaker, no one wants to be unemployed.

no one wants to be out of work. and no one wants to be called a hobo. no one has ever come up to me and said, congresswoman, i love being unemployed. life on unemployment is such a picnic. no, they are not saying that. they say, shelley, congresswoman, i want a job. find me a job. i want to work so i can take care of my family. mr. speaker, nevada's unemployed are not hobo's. they are unemployed through no fault of their own and they are desperate, desperate to find a job. they can't afford not to work. and he they can't afford the kind of elitist and insulting attitude representing them in congress. they need all of us in the house, the senate working day and night to fix our economy and put people back to work. they don't have time for ideological battles about killing medicare, by turning it over to a private insurance company. they don't have time for vote

after vote protecting tax giver -- taxpayer give aways to big oil companies. it's time to get serious about creating jobs and it's time we get serious about extending critical unemployment insurance for families in nevada and across our nation. i ask my colleagues to support me in this much needed bill. and i thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. wolf, for five minutes. mr. wolf: thank you, mr. speaker. general electric, the nation's largest corporation, had a very good year in 2010. these were the opening words of a march 24 "new york times" article. the article continued explaining that g.e. paid zero taxes in the u.s. in 2010. meanwhile, the congressional research service found that the

october, 2008 issue china taxation magazine, published top corporate taxpayers in the commercial service sector that beijing subsidiary at g.e. was number 32. while we don't yet have the data regarding g.e.'s tax payments in china for 2010, it is note worth that g.e., an american company, paid no federal taxes in its home country last year while being honored for being a significant source of tax revenue to china. china with the horrific human rights abuses, persecution of people of faith, censorship of the press, cyberespecially knowledge, and support of rogue regimes, like the president of sudan, where genocide takes place. this should give the congress pause. it is particularly alarming in the midst of economic trouble at home but my concern does not end

there. u.s. companies like g.e. are increasingly saying american -- sending american jobs to china. general electric's health care unit recently announced it was moving its headquarters of its 1 50-year-old x-ray business from wisconsin to beijing. ironically the head of president obama's council on jobs and competitive is g.e. chairman. meanwhile half of g.e.'s work force is overseas. he's creating jobs, but he's creating jobs in china. g.e.'s profits for china has economic implications here at home. in addition to the national security ramifications, this week i wrote defense secretary urging him to conduct a national security review of the recently announced joint venture between general electric, g.e., and the chinese firm, avic, to develop avionics for systems for jets. this partnership is troubling

for a number of reasons. including the rapid advances in chinese aeronautics and space program, and the unprecedented chinese threat from cyberattacks and espionage. yet according to an august "washington post" article, g.e. has dismissed concerns about providing the people's liberation army with advanced avionics technology. the chief executive at g.e.'s aviation system said, quote, we are all in and we don't want it back. wow, is this true? they don't want it back? they want to give technology to the people's liberation army? statements like this fail to acknowledge reality. according to a november 4 article from "the washington post," the administration's office of the national counterintelligence executive had issued a warning that, quote, chinese actors are the world's most active and persistent perpetrators of economic especially, end of

quote. prolific chinese espionage is having a real effect on job creation. given the breath and scope of this espionage, which is well documented by the u.s. intelligence community, g.e.'s public assertion they will be able to fully protect sensitive technology lacks credibility. should the g.e.-avic joint venture proceed, there is no question that the technology involved will be completely compromised by the people's liberation army. g.e. has a proud tradition as an american company, and it's past time for companies likes g.e. to bring the jobs back to america. to date there have been no plans from this administration to do just that. but when the house takes up the omnibus appropriations bill this week that will change. i worked to include provisions to help bring back manufacturing jobs to the u.s. from china and other countries. this can help state and local

governments better compete for those jobs. american workers are among the most skilled in the world. american ingenuity is our greatest strength. we can and must compete. it is time to bring the jobs home. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. mccaul, for five minutes. mr. mccaul: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in support of the balanced budget amendment to the constitution. our debt burden in this country is so heavy it is no longer simply a financial issue. it is a moral issue. we have spent and spent, racking up astrodomical debt that will dampen the american dream for our children and grandchildren. if we continue on this path we'll guarantee that future generations will have unsustainable tax burdens, monstrous inefficient bureaucracies, and a lifestyle so diminished that it will no

longer resemble the america we all know and love. that is not what our founding fathers had in mind when they formed this great nation. in fact, in 1798 thomas jefferson wrote, i wish it were possible to obtain a single amendment to our constitution. i mean an additional article taking from the federal government the power of borrowing. thomas jefferson could never in his wildest dreams have imagined that our debt would one day top $14 trillion. threatening our very way of life. unfortunately, this is a problem that own gets worse. every year that we produce a budget, our spending grows. ronald reagan had it right when he said, no government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. a government program is the nearest thing on earth we'll ever see to eternal life. and that was back in the 1980's

when our debt was a fraction of what it is now. our debt has grown so out of control that it not only saddles future generations with our irresponsibility, but opposes the national security threat -- poses a national security threat to our country today. former chairman of joint chiefs of staff, admiral mike mullen, recently stated our increasing debt is the biggest threat that we have to our national security. we are playing with fire. and it is time to stop and it's time to do the right thing. not only do 49 states have a balanced budget amendment, but americans all across the country have to balance their household budgets. it is time for congress to do the same. and balance america's checkbook. some of our friends on the other side of the aisle agree. in a recent letter to house members, the gentleman from oregon, mr. defazio, asked his colleagues to buck their leadership and vote for the

balanced budget amendment. he said going against it is a strategic mistake, and i agree. miss party's leadership evidently disagrees. in a recent headline in "usa today" says it all. house democrats -- dems will block the balanced budget amendment to the constitution. . they will be on the wrong side of history. it's time for us to take a stand. let's stand on the side of our children and grandchildren and on the side of jefferson and reagan and with those who believe that safety and security of our country should come before this short-term insatiable appetite for ever increasing government spending. the time is now. let's support the balanced budget amendment and put an end to fiscal insanity that threatens this great country. thank you and with that i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house in recess until 12:00 1 . >> the joint deficit reduction committee to, quote, go big in a solution reducing the debt and deficit. this runs about 15 minutes.

>> thank you for coming this morning. we have with us today -- thank you for coming this morning. we have here a bipartisan and bicameral group of legislators that have been dubbed the go big coalition that have been urging, as i'm sure you are all aware, the supercommittee to go big. we all believe it needs to do that if we are going to stabilize the debt in this country and start paying down our debt. we want to encourage the supercommittee, although there's just a week left before they have to report, this is not rocket science, they can do this. they can go big and they can help us solve this problem. so we want them to know there is a bipartisan group of legislators on both sides of the aisle, on both ends of the capitol that want to work on this and want to make the tough votes that are necessary to get us out of the situation we are currently in. we are going to have a few speakers this morning.

aim going to reserve my remarks -- i'm going to reserve my remarks because i have others who want to speak. mr. hoyer: thank you very much, speaker simpson. ladies and gentlemen, mike simpson's from idaho. former speaker of the idaho house. he and i had a relationship because i was president of the maryland senate. we started a relationship early in his career, not in mine because i had been here some time. this is the kind of comment that undermines cooperation in the congress of the united states. mike simson's been my partner along with heath shuler and others and peter welch and others and mark warner, chambliss happens to be my

fraternity brother. the public doesn't believe we have good friends across the aisle. that's not accurate. nor do they believe we can work across the aisle. we are here today to say, we must work across the aisle in both houses to get this country on the right track. let years then chairman of the joint chiefs, admiral mike mullen, said that, and i quote, our national debt is our biggest national security threat. that is why we all stand here on this podium. republicans, democrats, house members, senate members. we must do something to start paying down the debt and that something is in the hands of the joint select committee on deficit reduction. two weeks ago a number of us from the house, some 100 democrats and republicans, stood together to send a message that we want the joint select committee to send us a deal that is big. about $4 trillion in deficit reduction, and is accompanied --

accomplished through a balanced mix of reductions in mandatory expenditures and additional revenues. mike simpson said when we had that press conference it cannot be done any other way. today we return and are joined by senators from parties who share our concern about deficits and agree that committee members for the sake of our country and its soundnies cal future, should recommend a package of cuts, revenues, and reforms consistent with the gang of six proposals. we have the greatest chance we have seen in a generation to strike a bold agreement that will move us forward on a sustainable fiscal path and spur economic recovery. to do so as we have all seen is not easy. we recognize the pressures committee members are facing from multiple directions. but we want them to know that there is a large and significant number of us in both chambers

who want such a deal and are ready to give it a fair shot. that is why we are standing together today, democrats and republicans, united. to send a message of urgency and support. more than 100 of us in the house, split nearly evenly between parties, have already sent a letter to that effect. none of us, none of us want to risk the immediate and long-term effect of sequestration that it will bring if the committee fails in its task. sequestration is not a worthwhile option. at risk is more than just the economic impact but also the trust the american people have in their government to solve the most pressing problems we face as a nation. i want to thank all my colleagues, senate, house, republicans, and democrats. i want to thank all the house and senate members who have come together to send this message that the seriousness of the debt challenge can only be met with

an equally serious and bipartisan determination to do what needs to be done, to do what the american people expect of us. and i'll now yield to my friend saxby chambliss. >> thanks, steny. let me just say to heath shuler and mike simpson, as well as my good friend, steny hoyer, how much we appreciate their leadership and their willingness to step up show their support along with all of our colleagues in the united states senate, who have committed to say to the supercommittee the right thing to do is to go big. go big may mean $3 trillion, it may mean four, five, six to some people. but if we don't get to that level of deficit reduction, then we are not showing to the world marketplace, to americans, and other people around the world

who are watching closely what's happening in the united states congress today and over the next week. that we are serious about this issue of the debt and the deficit. that we are not going to send the right message. i'm very proud to stand here with these folks today and say supercommittee, we got your back. we support you. we look forward to working with you on whatever course you decide to take to make sure that we do the right thing for the american people as well as to continue to show that americaing leads the financial free market and we are going to be there to back you to make sure that that leadership continues. with that ill aturn to heath shuler -- i'll turn to heath shuler. >> with this many people here i'll take the podium when i get the opportunity. saxby, thank you. incredible work has been done. the house working group through multiple leaderships of both

democrats and republicans and what the gang of six has been able to work together, and now look at us. we have a substantial amount, over 150 members that may not all be here because of the room, but over 150 members in the united states house and senate have come together to say, we want to go big. that time is of the essence. we can't kick the can down the road. that's been going on for a decade now. now is the time. and they have the support of these members of congress. this is the true states men and women before you. it's not about their elections. it's not about what's on the her rison politically for themselves. this is about the american people. this is about the next generation. we can't turn our back on them, the next generation. we must leave this country better than we found it. and the way that's going to be

done is through working together in a bipartisan way. i'll turn it over to mark. >> set a record and be the briefest of anybody because i want to make sure these colleagues get a chance. failure can't be an option. the whole rest of the world is watching. and the notion of what's happening in europe and their lack of stepping up we can't have the repeat of that here in this country. whether we like it or not, this debt and deficit debate has become an effective proxy for whether our democratic institutions are up for the job in the 21st century. and i think you are sighing behind us here a growing bipartisan group in both the house and senate that want to get the job done. let's make sure we hear from some other folks. >> the world is watching. we know that the economic future of our country and the world rests on decisions that will be

made in the next few days. this is a circumstance that requires us to work together. we know it's tough. we know it's been done. the group of six did it, simpson bowls did it -- simpson-bowles did it. this group can do t they need to know if they are bold, if they are brave, if they go big we will stand with them and the american people will stand with them. >> you heard the message, but there's really three critical points to make here. we are here to support the supercommittee. to make sure the supercommittee knows that we've got its back and we will come together on a bipartisan basis to help america find a solution. number two, the $4 trillion figure, the effort to go big, is not just an arbitrary number. it's what we all learned is what we must do as a minimum to achieve the kind of fiscal

reform in america that will help keep us the greatest nation and the greatest economy in the world. and to make sure that those on the supercommittee and those in the congress and frankly that the world markets know that we have the ability to develop a bipartisan solution. and that we are ready to back it. a we are going to breakway from the briefing at this point. had some technical issues. a reminder you can watch all of it in our video library. the u.s. house comes back in in about half an hour, noon eastern, they will take up a bill on repealing a 3% withholding for government contractors. but the main item on the agenda in taking up much of the time will be a bill which would allow gun owners with proper permits to carry concealed handguns across state lines regardless of state laws. there is an hour of general debate ahead. 10 amendments to be considered. and that's coming up, house coming in at noon live here on c-span. up to noon we are going to show

you some of the debate from yesterday. the rule debate on the concealed carry bill. led by rich nugent, republican of florida, and luis slaughter of new york. -- louise slaughter of new york. rule, house resolution 463. the rule provides for consideration to an important piece of legislation, h.r. 822. the national right to carry press ross it act of 2011. i'm proud to sponsor this rule which provides for a structured amendment process that will allow members to have a thorough debate on a wide variety of relevant and germane amendments to h.r. 822. we have allowed 10 amendments to this bill, two republican amendments, and eight democratic amendments. even as contense -- contentious bill, a bill that would be easy to shut down the process, we are not only allowing amendments, but those debated on the floor, the vast majority

we did this not because it was the easy thing to do. we did it because it was the right thing to do. it brought transparency to the debate, and it is in keeping with the promises of the republican party made to the america people for a freer, more open process. madam speaker, until coming to this body 10 months ago, hi spent my entire career as a cop. the last 10 years as sheriff in florida. during my 38 years in law enforcement i found disarming honest citizens does nothing to reduce crime. if anything all it does is keep law-abiding citizens from being able to defend themselves from violent criminals. although i know this just from my anecdotal experience, research backs up the claim. for example, statistics indicate that citizens with carry permits are more law-abiding than the general public. in my home state of florida, only .01% of nearly 1.2 million permits have been revoked

because of firearms crimes committed by permit holders. additionally, evidence indicates that crime declines in states with rights to carry laws. since florida became a right to carry state in 1987, florida's violent total crime and murder rates have dropped 32% and 58% respectively. because of this evidence as well as my firsthand experience, i'm a proud defender of our second amendment right. ensure the right of people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. my history as a law enforcement officer is also why i'm a proud co-sponsor of h.r. 822, the national right to carry repros it act of 2011. it's a good bipartisan bill which enhances constitutional rights of law-abiding gun owners. today if i drive from my home state of florida into georgia, georgia recognizes my florida driver's license. it's still vadly even once i cross the state line.

h.r. 822 requires states to recognize each other's legally issued concealed carry permits in the same way. this legislation would take a comprehensive approach to helping law-abiding citizens navigate the patchwork of state concealed carry laws. 822 does not, let me repeal, does not create a national conceal carry permit system, nor does it establish any nationalized standard for carry permit. h.r. 822 respects states' abilities to create their own gun usage laws as well as their own permitting processes. i'm sure that you'll hear argue ments from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle saying that 822, h.r. 822, somehow makes it easier for people to get a gun. let me assure you that again this is not the case. this legislation does not mandate that anyone suddenly be given a gun. nor does it relax any of the state's current permitting laws.

during my nearly 40 years as a cop, i learned you just can't talk about guns. when you are talking about gun crime, you need to look at two distinct classes of guns. there are legal guns and illegal guns. i can tell you as a cop you don't worry about the legal guns. the guns that people brought from an authorized source, that they are registered, and proper authorities they took the necessary class to learn how to use them responsibly and they got their legal concealed carry permit. in my experience you worry about the illegal guns. guns that are somebody purposely bought them off the radar either because they aren't legally allowed to own a gun or because they are going to use them for an illegal purpose. h.r. 822 doesn't get into that difference. what it does is ensures that a legal gun owner don't accidentally break the law simply because they brought their fully permitted gun to

another state. this legislation simply gives peace of mind to americans traveling adross state lines -- across state lines with legally registered concealed firearm knowing they can practice their constitutional right to bear arms. again i'm a proud co-sponsor of h.r. 822 and support its passage. with that i encourage all my colleagues to vote yes on the rule. yes on the underlying legislation. and i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. >> i thank the gentleman from florida for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. >> without objection. >> i yield myself such time as i may consume. >> the gentleman is recognized. >> let me rise in opposition to this restrictive rule. yet another restrictive rule. a lot of good amendments were not made in order and members do not have the right to offer amendments as they see fit during this debate. i would urge my colleagues to vote no on the rule for that reason. madam speaker, another week and

hot button social issue is being brought to the floor by this extreme republican leadership. a few weeks ago this house debated an abortion bill. that's month after we considered legislation to defund planned parenthood. this republican leadership has tried hard to overturn the clean air act and clean water act. simply because the corporate constituency demands it. and now we are turning to guns. we are about to debate legislation that makes it easier to carry concealed weapons in the united states. in fact, we are considering a bill that will make it easier for convicted felons. yet what do americans want most of all right now? are they screaming about a lengthy abate on abortion issues? do they want us debating whether or not we need to reaffirm our national motto? are they clamoring for more lenient gun laws? no, madam speaker. the american people want jobs. j-o-b-s, jobs. my republican friends are either too stubborn to listen or care enough to do something about the

problem. maybe they are covering their eyes and plugging their ears hoping this crisis will disappear. that may work for a 6-year-old who is scared of ghosts, that's not how you govern a contry. our unemployment rate is 9%. there are just under 14 million unemployed americans. millions more are learning less than they were before the economic crisis simply because they were forced with the choice to take a lower paying job or face unemployment. what's the republican response to this problem? not a jobs bill. in fact the republicans haven't brought up a jobs bill once in this congress. so what then is the response of the jobs problem? surprise, surprise, it's a gun bill. madam speaker what, we doing here? this is nuts. this isn't what the american people sent us here to do. the irony is many of the new republicans who were allegedly sent here because of their opposition to federal encroachment on states' rights, but here we are debating a bill that imposes the federal role on states and undermines states' laws. this is crazy in normal times,

madam speaker. it's even crazier today. and unlike the resolution reaffirming our national motto that we debate add few weeks ago, this legislation will have real impacts on people's lives. madam speaker, people will be hurt because of this legislation. people in fact may die because of this bill. don't take my word for it, look at the facts. the bill obliterates state and local eligibility rules for concealed weapons. it eliminates the state's discretion to honor another state's permits. it requires states with responsible restrictions like my home state of massachusetts to allow people with permits from states with lax laws to bring concealed weapons into those states. simply it allows a person to bring a hidden loaded gun into a state where under today's laws they are currently ineligible to carry a concealed weapon. there are reasons states don't allow certain people to carry concealed weapons and each state is different. my home state of massachusetts doesn't issue concealed weapons permits to people who have

specific dangerous misdemeanor criminal convictions or alcohol abuse problems. as well as people who have not completed firearm safety training. people who do not have a good character. or those who are under the age of 21. i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record following my remarks a letter from the massachusetts secretary of public safety and security in opposition to this bill. but under this bill, a person who is convicted of spousal abuse in one state could go to a second state for a concealed weapon permit. when they get that permit, this bill allows that felon to bring their weapon into massachusetts even though they would not be eligible for concealed weapon permit under current massachusetts laws. my friends on the other side of the aisle will say this bill is necessary. that more guns mean less crime. that people need to be able to protect themselves. well, that's not how our nation's mayors see it. mayors against illegal guns strongly opposes this bill because it makes our cities less, not more, less safe. mayors against illegal guns started by the boston mayor and the new york city mayor is made

up of over 600 mayors of all political stripes united to respect the rights of law-abiding gun owners while keeping guns out of the hands of criminals and other dangerous people. i'm especially grateful for the national leadership of mayor tom mineta. not only do more than 600 mayors in this coalition oppose this bill, so do the international association of chiefs of police, major cities chiefs association, the police foundation, the national latino peace officers association, and the national organization of black law enforcement executives. in fact, not only does the american bar association oppose this bill, so does the association of prosecuting attorneys. i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record following my remarks the statement by the mayors against illegal guns in opposition. >> without objection. >> massachusetts is fortunate to have a number of meant gun violence leaders in the commonwealth. in addition to the mayor, we are home to stop handgun violence, and specifically its founder,

john rosenthal. gun safety laws work. they keep our citizens safe. in fact, massachusetts has the most comprehensive and effective prevention laws and lowest firearm fatality rate of any urban industrial state and second lowest overall behind hawaii. every day more than 150 americans are shot. and 83 die from gun violence in the united states. a child under 20 years old dies from gun violence every three hours. eight kids every single day. we could fill fenway park three times with -- three times over with 110,000 kids under 20 years old killed by guns in the past 30 years. there is still no national law requiring criminal background checks for all gun sales in the u.s. in fact, in 33 states there is no background check requirement or even proof of i.d. for private gun sales. today we are going to make it easier for these people to carry concealed weapons.

massachusetts is the leader in gun violence prevention. we should be working to prevent gun violence not encouraging it with legislation like this. madam speaker, federal preemption of massachusetts law will only result in more innocent and largely preventable gun deaths in my home state. the same holds true for nearly every state in the union. predevelopmenting the laws will make this country less safe and can i not and will not support legislation that makes our neighborhoods and cities and our states less safe. madam speaker, let me conclude by saying if we weren't to -- want to combat crime f. we want to make our neighborhood safer, i would urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to join with us and bring the president's jobs bill to the floor. let's provide people with jobs and economic security. let's revitalize our neighborhoods that are struggling in poverty. that's what we should be doing. not debating a bill to make it easier to carry concealed weapons. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the rule and vote no on final passage of the bill. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman reserves the

balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. >> madam speaker, my colleague on the other side of the aisle talks about jobs bill. we are not talking about it right now, but if you look at this card, we have over 20 jobs bills that have passed out of this body that are sitting in the senate today. madam speaker, i reserve the balance. >> the gentleman reserves the balance of his time of the the gentleman from massachusetts. >> i'm proud -- i'm proud to yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from new york, the ranking member of the rules committee, ms. slaughter. >> the gentlewoman from new york is recognized for three minutes. >> i thank the gentleman for yielding. this is a serious piece of work for me today because less than a year ago one of our colleagues from arizona was shot in the head while she was trying to coin convenient with her constituents outside a supermarket. the mayhem was awful. a little 19-year-old girl, baseball fan, who just came to

see her congresswoman, was killed. and by all accounts the federal judge died. as well as some of gabby's staff . numbers of people wounded. and yet the only person ever considered by this house would be the guy and his right to have that gun. what about the rights of the rest of us? are we going to have to learn to dance up and down the street to try to escape the bullets? what happens to us? what about an amendment for us that we can be safe? the statistics of people now being killed in places of worship is rising number of people in law enforcement who face unspeakable and awful things because we won't do our job here to disarm people who are mentally ill. and i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record an article from "the new york times" of how easy it is for felons, including the mentally ill, to regain their gun rights.

when are we going to reinstate in this house the automatic weapons bans and why don't we outlaw guns that are so powerful they serve no purpose at all in a civilized society? when will we allow the federal authority to computerize gun sale records so it's easier to hold a guilty individual responsible for the gun crime? in the age of iphones and androids, our police are tracing gun crimes with scraps of paper and handwritten notes and surely that is more important job for us to do here than what we are doing to say you could carry a concealed weapon anywhere you want to go because that's who we are. apparently the republican majority wants that. based on today's bill they think it's more important to pass legislation that will make it easier to carry a gun to a public gathering. easier to carry a loaded weapon into an nfl stadium. easier to carry a gun to a grocery store on saturday afternoon. or your temple or church.

what in the world, how could we every explain that to people who have had gun deaths in their family? the horrible shooting of our colleague wouldn't have been stopped with the passage of today's bill and no one's made safer by allowing the guns into public space. but since last january, congress hasn't considered a single piece of legislation that would make it harder for a mentally ill individual to get a gun. we have done nothing at all to make sure another nightmare like the one in tucson doesn't visit our country yet again. leaving innocent children, men, and women victims to a loaded gun. the only person we care about here is the gun owner. the only legislation we are considering will make it more convenient to carry your gun even in states that don't want it. realizing this fact really puts the morality of this agenda into perspective. we should be--congress should be considering legislation that

will help american people not legislation that fulfills an ideological agenda. which is what we have been doing all year. i urge my colleagues to vigorously oppose today's legislation and i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from florida. >> madam speaker, in 2007 a colorado man shot a colorado man named matthew murray, allegedly wrote online, all i want to do is kill and injure as many christians as i could. he then went on a shooting rampage. first killing two young students at a training center outside denver, and gathering of 7,000 people in and around the new life church in colorado spring, colorado, with a rifle and a backpack full of ammunition. he entered the church and opened fire. killing few sisters. he was ultimately stopped and killed by a church member and a volunteer security guard who has

a concealed carry permit and once worked in law enforcement. they shot murray several times leaving him to kill himself. i reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from massachusetts. >> i'd yield three minutes to the gentleman from colorado, a member of the rules committee, mr. polis. >> the gentleman from colorado is recognized for three minutes. mr. polis: -- >> in hearing the story my friend from florida, my colleague from the rules committee, it emphasizes that my state of colorado already has a concealed carry process. we have a must issue provision that some of our county sheriffs were not issuing and denying issuance unreasonably. again it highlights that this entire bill is a dangerous solution in search of a problem. colorado has reciprocal concealed carry arrangements with over 30 states, including all of our neighboring states. so you can drive from colorado to wyoming in the south. you can drive from colorado to new mexico -- in the north.

wyoming. into new mexico, east, west. you are in no danger about your concealed weapon permit not being recognized. yes, there are states we don't have an agreement from. for instance the state of nevada. and i fail to be convinced that the proper venue for that is not for the people of the sovereign state of nevada and colorado to elect leadership that will work on a resip prokohl carry arrangement if that's what they want to do. if there is a real issue there, my constituents are hampered by their ability not to have their colorado concealed weapons permit recognized let's say in the state of california, it's a matter between the states. opening the door for federal intervention in this very sensitive area opens the door to a federal gun owner registry which a number of gun owners -- gun rights advocates in my district have expressed a great deal of worry over. as well as open the door for a whole host of other problems that can come from washington,

d.c., bureaucrats deciding where you can and can't take your guns. rather than protecting our second amendment in the states. some other concerns that have been articulated to me from some of the gun owners rights groups in the state of colorado of the they are worried about more onerous standards to require a permit. they are worried about a national data base of permit holders. they are also worried about this particular provision nullifying the constitutional carry provisions on the books in arizona, alaska, vermont, and wyoming, and states that have a popular election method of amending the constitution are able to do. gheas the problem? i have not -- what's the problem? i have not had any constituents contact me worried they can't use their concealed weapons permit in a particular state. i think they are generally, and i have many conceal and carry, don't happen to be one myself, but they are able to, again, in all the bordering states drive

across state borders and not have to worry about relicensing or notifying horts in those states. i think the gentleman from florida articulated an example of colorado where our conceal carry permit holder helped save lives. and i think that's a fine and good thing. it's an area of state sovereignty. i asked the chair of the judiciary committee yesterday in rules whether he thought this provision was actually required to protect the second amendment. he responded, no. the second amendment can be -- the state does not have to have a concealed weapon system, carry system under the second amendment. it's a matter of discretion or policy in that state. i think this bill runs contrary to state sovereignty and privacy of individuals. that's why i will encourage my colleagues to vote no on this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentleman's time has expired. gentleman from florida. >> the gentleman talks about state rights and we agree. there are states that do not have concealed permit and carry permits. and so it is within the states' rights to decide whether or not

how they are going to regulate that particular issue in regards to weapons in their state. i'd like to, madam speaker, i'd like to yield three minutes to the gentlewoman from north carolina, dr. foxx. >> the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized for three minutes. >> thank you, madam speaker. i thank my friend from florida for handling the rule. madam speaker, i rise today in support of this rule and underlying bill. as a life member of the national rifle association and strong supporter of the second amendment to the united states constitution, i am pleased to speak in support of h.r. 822, the national right to carry reciprocity act. which will help protect law-abiding american citizens' right to bear arms. the supreme court ruled in district of columbia vs. heller that, quote, the inherent right of self-defense has been central to the second amendment right, end quote.

and in mcdonald vs. city of chicago, that the federal government can intervene to ensure that state and local governments are not restricting second amendment rights. statistics show correlation between right to carry laws and a decrease in violent crime rates. according to n.r.a. estimates based on the annual uniform crime report, states that have right to carry laws have 22% lower total violent crime rates. 30% lower murder rates. 46% lower robbery rates. and 12% lower aggravated assault rates compared to the rest of the country. law-abiding citizens have the right to protect themselves from criminals and defend themselves with firearms. throughout my career in elected office, i worked with my colleagues to ensure that american citizens maintain their second amendment rights. each state has different eligibility requirements and h.r. 822 maintains the states' ability to set its own

elinlibility. however the bill would end uncertainty and confusion for concealed carry permit holders when they travel. 49 states allow individuals to conceal and carry handguns and the bill before us would allow individuals who hold a concealed carry permit in their state of residents to carry that weapon in other states that allow concealed carry. madam speaker, this rule should be passed unanimously as should the underlying bill. i yield back the balance of my time. >> the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from massachusetts. >> i ask unanimous consent to insert in the record the dissenting views from the judiciary committee entitled loosening restrictions on the carrying of concealed guns and public does not improve public safety. >> without objection. >> i'm happy to yield two minutes to the gentleman from oklahoma, mr. boren. >> the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for two minutes. >> i rise today in support of h.r. 822, the national right to carry act of 2011. the second amendment of the united states constitution

provides citizens with the individual right to keep and bear arms. this right enables americans to use firearms for self-protection, for hunting, and other lawful activities. h.r. 822 would guarantee that individuals who are legally licensed to carry a concealed weapon in their home state could also legally carry a concealed weapon in another state. the bill seeks to protect our fundamental liberty not restrict it. just as one state recognizes a driver's license issued by another state, i believe states should recognize conceal and carry licenses issued by another. dade some states already have reciprocity agreements to recognize the conceal and carry laws in other states while some do no. the result is a piecemeal system where a law-abiding sit den may be required to give up his or her -- citizen may required to give up his or her weapon at the state line.

this bill would streamline the system by making it simple and uniform. h.r. 822 does not create a -- create federal standards for obtaining permits. nor does it require states to adopt a specific licensing system. each state's right to determine its own permitting system will remain intact regardless of h.r. 822. you know, since the founding of our nation american citizens have had the constitutional right to bear arms and i believe this legislation is commonsense solution to preserve that right. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on the rule today and to support final passage of h.r. 822. yields back. the gentleman from florida. >> madam speaker, i continue toe reserve the balance of my time. >> the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. >> madam speaker, i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. >> the gentleman from oregon is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you. it's sad that we are taking time that should be spent on the

economy and making communities safer and stronger to facilitate instead less rational and less effective gun safety laws. i deeply appreciate ms. slaughter putting "the new york times" article from last sunday in the record. the gentleman from florida talks about his experience. in that article is sad evidence, for example in the state of washington where that tragic occurrence occurred, since 1995 more than 3,300 felons and people convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors have regained gun rights and according to the analysis provided by the state and court system, of those more than 400, about 13% have subsequently committed new crimes and more than 200 committed felonies, including murder, assault in the first and second degree, child rape, and drive by shooting. the gentleman talks about evidence. study in the american public health journal referenced in that article found that the nine

handgun purchases to felons cut the risk of their committing new gun or violent crimes by 20% to 30%. in another study by the journal of the american medical association, found that handgun purchasers with at least one prior misdemeanor, not a felony, a misdemeanor were more than seven times as likely as those with no criminal record to be charged with new offenses. i come from a state that would have its protections undermined by this proposal. i think the fact by require character references, people have to be 21 years of age, that we prohibit concealed weapon carrying by dangerous criminals, those who have been convicted of a misdemeanor such as assault, harassment, driving while intoxicated, i think those are reasonable. that's the minimum in oregon. and instead the enactment of

this legislation will enable a race to the bottom where the lowest common denominator will determine gun law, safety laws in oregon. i think that's wrong. i urge rejection of the rule and the bill. >> the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from florida. >> continue to reserve. >> the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from massachusetts. >> madam speaker, i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentleman from virginia, a member of the judiciary committee, mr. scott. >> the gentleman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. >> thank you. madam speaker, this bill undermines public safety and that's why law enforcement organizations oppose the bill. it says that there is no national law established by this legislation. that's right. because if there was a national law there would be national standards. this is actually worse. the law in effect will actually be the law with the -- of the state of the weakest concealed weapons permit that would essentially become the law of the land because you could use

that perfect knit in -- permit in any state this. allows people who are ineligible to go to another jurisdiction and get coin sealed weapons permit and use that concealed weapons permit anywhere in the country except their home state. states have different minimum standards for concealed weapons such as some require minimum training so that you know what you're dealing with. others deny permits to certain sex offenders or domestic violence offenders. all of those minimum standards will be overridden by this bill which -- because permits from other states will have to be recognized. basic controversy, madam chair, presented by this bill is the question of what happens if more people carry firearms. so many people believe if more people carry firearms, the crime rate will go down. the studies i have seen conclude if more people are carrying firearms, it is more likely that somebody in their home or an innocent neighbor will be killed.

that's more likely than the firearm being successfully used to thwart a crime. we should not undermine public safety. we should allow states to set their own concealed weapons standards and defeat this rule and if the rule passes defeat the bill. i yield back. >> the gentleman yields back. does the gentleman from florida wish to continue to reserve? >> continue to reserve. >> the gentleman from massachusetts. >> i'm happy yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentlewoman new york, mrs. mccarthy. >> the gentlewoman new york is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mrs. mccarthy: i thank the gentleman and thank you, madam speaker. i rise today in opposition for the rule of h.r. 822. as you know this committee voted down a motion to consider the bill through the open rule. this is such an important issue we need to have the entire nation hear about it and have all of us have our voices heard. i want to make sure i get to speak on an amendment of mine that is going to be considered. under my amendment states would be required to proactively opt in to the agreement called for

by h.r. 822. this would restore the critical decision of who would be able to carry a concealed handgun in our communities back to where it belongs. to local governments that have to deal with the policing and other consequences such as this provision will do. we also hear about other amendments that would restore rights back to states and safety back to our communities. and some sanity back into this debate. > we'll leave the rule debate at this time. the house is gaveling in. an hour of general debate on that gun bill. 10 amendments to be considered. also work on a bill repealing the 3% tax for government contractors. live house coverage now here on c-span. chaplain conroy: let us pray. god of all the universe, we give you thanks for giving us another day. on this day we are mindful of our shared inheritance from a great ancestor of faith who is call by you to leave his home

and go to a place he would be shown by you. bless the members of this people's house and their senate colleagues who honor our pioneers of space exploration this day with the congressional gold medal. we thank you for the spirit of exploration that you have placed within us, in which our great nation and most especially some of our most heroic citizens have utilized to expand the horizons of human longing and possibility through space travel. in these difficult times, in our history, most notably for our fellow citizens struggling to make ends meet, may the members of this house imagine solutions that might seem to be as unreachable as the moon once was thought to be. and work together to obtain the common goal of a working and prosperous america. may all that is done this day be

for your greater honor and glory, amen. . the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. journal journal. -- pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led today by the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg. mr. walberg: please join me. 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 pro tempore: the chair will now entertain up to 20 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: madam speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. wilson: madam speaker, according to the department of the treasury as of november 14, 2011, the national debt had

reached $14.973 trillion and will reach $15 trillion in the coming days. this is an economic threat to american families. since the president took office in 2009, the deficit has increased by a record $4.3 trillion. in order to protect america's future, we must be serious about cutting run away spending and we must act now to promote small businesses to create jobs. house republicans have sent nearly 90 bills to the senate for consideration to encourage jobs. this legislation dealt directly with limiting spending, terminating failing housing programs, and encouraging job growth and job creation. it's time for the liberals in the senate and president to do the same. in conclusion, got bless our troops, we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. our sympathy to the family of steve cogman, assistant solicitor.

>> madam speaker i'd like to request unanimous consent to remove my name as a co-sponsor of h.r. 4010. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> i also ask permission to speak for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. baca: today i rise to honor the contributions of america's first people in recognition of native american heritage month. throughout history native americans have made countless advances for our nation and society and our culture. the constitution separation of power we have in our government is based on the struck ture of our nation. jim thorpe brought home two olympic gold medals in 1912. navajo code talkers helped us win the pacific campaign in world war ii. ira hayes became a national hero raising the flag at iwo jima. jim plucket is one of only four men to win the super bowl m.v.p.

award. as a member -- and another award. i have introduced a holiday in california, and in 2009 i introduced legislation signed by president obama designating friday after thanksgiving as native american heritage day. we must never take for granted the rich history and culture of our first americans. this november i encourage everyone to honor the contributions of our tribal communities and recognize native american heritage. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? the gentleman is recognized. mr. walberg: madam speaker, i rise today to express my opposition to the new guidelines from the administration that restricts marketing certain food and beverage products to our children. instead of principles, these guidelines should be treated as what they really are, unnecessary regulations. as introduced by the administration, these rules falsely claim to be voluntary. for the first time in our nation's history, the food and beverage industry and advertising businesses will be forced to completely a.m.t.er

the way they promote -- alter the way they promote their healthy products. great michigan companies like kelloggs that already make nutritious products will be harshly affected. stripping tony the tiger off cereal boxes won't make children healthier. it will tack on another burdensome regulation for keg logs and other companies to -- kelloggs and other companies to deal with. guidelines with this type of power should be -- should not circumvent the normal rule making process including renew by the o.m.b. these guidelines should be withdrawn immediately by the administration. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> madam speaker, last year unemployment insurance kept over three million people, including a million kids, out of poverty. mr. stark: these benefits are due to expire and without an

extension, 300,000 or more than 300,000 californians will lose this lifeline. extending unemployment insurance is the smart thing to do. it creates jobs. people spend their benefits. they buy gasoline. groceries, put people to work in the communities. send their kids to school. people are scraping by on unemployment aren't looking for a handout. these are people who have been working for a long time, they are employable, they are just aren't jobs they are out there looking to find one. we should help them. they are not looking for a hand out. they are looking for a hand up. are we going to tell them we have money for wars and bank bailouts, tax cuts for millionaires? and not for workers? i don't think so. constituent frustrated at the gridlock in congress wrote, america make up before it's too late. our political system doesn't work. let's all work together and prove this constituent of mine wrong. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. poe: madam speaker, in the vast wide open rugged desolate hinterland southern border regions between the safer legal ports of entry, the cartels smuggle people and drugs into the united states. state and local officials do what they can to help the feds protect these areas, but they are simply outmanned and outequipped. madam speaker, the border patrol needs help from local officials. millions of pieces of equipment will soon return from iraq. this includes u.a.v.'s that could be used as eyes in the sky for the border defenders. this equipment could fill in the massive gaps and surveillance of remote areas of the border. i have introduced an act that would send u.a.v.'s, humvees, night surveillance equipment to our border governments. washington could partner with border states to protect america. sending surplus military equipment to the southern border will give americans a return on their investment by enhancing

our national security. the american people have invested billions of dollars in equipment used to secure iraq. now it's time to use this same equipment to secure the united states. that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from pennsylvania rise? the gentlelady is recognized. mr. schwarz: i firmly believe that we have the responsibility to better ensure that our nation's veterans find work when they return home. to me veterans especially most 9/11 are struggling to find employment. we can and must do better. last week i introduced the hiring our veterans act to strengthen current law that i introduced and championed successfully in 2007 and again in 2009 to provide tax credit to employers to hire unemployed veterans. ms. schwartz: today the house of representatives in a bipartisan way will pass legislation that builds on this effort and expands job opportunities for

our veterans. it will expand the maximum tax credit available to employers to hire disabled veterans who have been unemployed for six months and it strengthens the hiring tax credit to benefit both short-term and long-term unemployed veterans. this is a huge victory for our brave men and women and their families who have sacrificed so much for our nation and our freedom. as we wind down two wars, it is our duty and our honor to support our veterans and better ensure that they have good, stable jobs when they return to home. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from arkansas rise? >> to speak to the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> madam speaker, i rise today to honor mckey foods a. company in my district, mess known for its little debbie snack cakes. they are a role model for companies across the country. mr. womack: excellence in the treatment of its employees and excellence in finding a better way which by the way is mckey's motto.

in 1982 the company built a plant to gentry, arkansas. today the plant is a lifeblood of the community. it employs more than 1,500 people who take pride in their work, loyal to their company, and believe in service to their community. mckey has been best known for developing innovative processes to improve its operations and become a better corporate citizen. that's why the did -- the company's recent announcement produces zero land phil waste comes as no surprise. two years ago the plant management team and employees came together and challenged themselves to be better stewards of the environment by producing zero land phil waste. true to form the plant teamed up with local recycling companies and put in place new processes to achieve this goal. madam speaker, i congratulate mckey foods for its accomplishment. it is a tribute to the dedication of the company's leadership and its employees. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island rise? mr. cicilline: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. cicilline: madam speaker, i

rise today to honor rhode island's former attorney general, julius michaelson. julius passed away at his home this past saturday. he was a brilliant and caring man, deeply committed to social justice and equality. he was an accomplished lawyer and distinguished public servant who served our country both abroad and at home. he was the first lieutenant in the army in world war ii. a fashion gnat defender of justice, he also served as general counsel to the c.i.a. and state's attorney general. he's credit with playing a key role in the passage of our state's fair housing law. i had the pleasure of knowing him as a friend, colleague, and neighbor. his commitment to justice was unmatched. he made the world a better place. i offer my sincere condolences to the entire family. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. pitts: permission to address the house for one minute.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. pitts: madam speaker, this is a tar heel of two jobs programs. -- tale in the two jobs programs. in the first the government moves to put $500 million in loans to private company. they are supposed to build a factory and create what the vice president calls permanent jobs. the president tours their facility. the secretary of energy lauds the company. top white house officials show an interest in the project. o.m.b. worries are everyruled and the money is handed out. a year later the company is bankrupt and all the government money is lost. in the second tale, a private company wants to build a pipeline that would create 20,000 jobs directly and 100,000 jobs indirectly. they don't need a single dime of government money, in fact they are paying the bill for significant government environmental reviews of the project. even though their project is declared safe by the state department, they are ordered to perform another year of environmental studies. solyndra and keystone x.l. we have a white house that is eager to waste the public's money on one failing company but

stands in the way of another company that doesn't need a dollar from the american taxpayer. go figure. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: more than 400 unemployed americans have shared their story with us in the last two weeks. here they are. they illustrate in no uncertain terms of the urgent need for congress to extend federal unemployment insurance through 2012. without action, two million americans will lose their benefits by february as shown in this chart. two million americans like phil from clinton township. he wrote to us with a resolve common among the stories we have received, and i quote. i am by no means unintelligent. i am by no means lazy. and i am by no means giving up.

without unemployment benefits, i will not be able to pay my bills, including my cell phone, so i may receive calls from potential employers and finding something to eat will become increasingly difficult. congress has never allowed the federal program to expire with the unemployment rate as high as it remains today. we must not start now. we must act now. . the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker, i rise today to ask the american people to let their voice be heard. our crushing national debt and our out-of-control spending is something that has made -- been made aware of for so many but it is time to do something about it and as part of the house republican plan for america's job creators we have a stated goal, to pay down america's unsustainable debt burden and start living within our means.

madam speaker, when i served in the michigan legislature, we had to live under that same requirement of a balanced budget according to the michigan constitution. it made for some very, very difficult decisions but, you know what, madam speaker? the american people are not only ready, they are asking for this reasonable step to be made, for us to insert this balanced budget amendment into the united states constitution as well. they need to do it in their own lives, it's time government do it as well with theirs. living within our means is a requirement in their lives, it's a requirement for a vast majority of the state governments, it's time that the federal government do that as well. it's time for your voice to be heard and, frankly, madam chair, madam speaker, it's time for the american people to hold accountable those who will not listen. mr. huizenga: thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. capps: last week we celebrated veterans day. a time to remember those who have served our country.

and their families. as a nation we must live up to our obligations and responsibilities to care for our service men and women from the moment they join up and throughout their lives. and we have done this through the post-9/11 g.i. bill and our efforts to strengthen tricare. but now with over 12% unemployment for veterans, there's so much more we must do. and that's why i support the putting veterans to work tax credit for hiring veterans and wounded warriors that will be on the floor today. and it's why i introduced my own legislation, to help our military medics transition into civilian e.m.t. jobs so, that they can continue their service here at home. our commitment to our men and women in uniform doesn't end when they return. it lasts a lifetime. i urge my colleagues to support these bills so we can fulfill our commitment. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. roe: madam speaker, this week we will take what i believe is one of the most important votes we will cast in the u.s. congress, on the adding a balanced budget amendment to the u.s. constitution. with our national debt approaching $15 trillion, more than $47,900 for every man, woman and child in this nation, it's time to get serious about spending. that's why we must succeed where other congresses have failed and send this amendment to the states for ratification. according to the c.b.o., the budget submitted by the president earlier this year would add at no time over the next 10 years bring the deficit below $748 billion. this balanced budget amendment would require washington to live within its means just exactly like families do, cities, county, states do every day. it simply says that spending cannot exceed revenues unless 3/5 of each chamber approves. 48 states, including my home

state of tennessee, already have a balanced budget amendment. this is just common sense. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and the principles that it represents, spend less than you take in. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from maine rise? ms. pingree: when i moved to main 15 years ago, growing and selling healthy food locally was out of the mainstream. it was something that the back to the land crowd was into, but here in washington the government was pushing farmers to, in the words of agricultural secretary, get big or get out. it turns out that kind of thinking wasn't good for family farms. it wasn't good for rural communities and it wasn't good for our nation's health. that's why i've introduced a bill that is intended to make it easier for farmers to sell food locally and regionally, make it easier for schools to buy healthy local food and easier for us to rebuild the local and regional food systems.

over 100 organizations and 53 of my colleagues have endorsed the local farms food and jobs act, a package of reforms to the farm bill that will help move our nation's food policy in the right direction. everywhere i go people just want to know that the food they put on their table is healthy, fresh and good for their family. this bill will help that -- make that easier for american families. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: zwrat is recognized -- the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise to share my disappointment with the recent proposal by the administration to restrict food and bench marketing. like many -- beverage marketing. like many members, i'm concerned about the rise in childhood obesity, yet the proposed good night lines will do little to address the issue -- guidelines will do little to address the issue. this blatantly contradicts federal nutrition standards. many healthy products could no

longer be advertised or marketed, including most soups, breads, serials, yoge arts and most -- cereals, yogerts and most cheese. this is are products that are considered healthy. any proposal to regulate food should be based on sound nutritional standards and common sense. we should let science, not politics, lead the way. the first step is to complete the study originally requested by the congress and then we'll go from there. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky rise? -- connecticut rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> madam speaker, i rise today to honor army staff sergeant aroundy colors who lost his life on october 30, 2011, in kandahar province. sergeant colors was born 28 years ago in new london, connecticut, and later moved to waterford where he attended school and graduated from waterford high school in 2001.

mr. courtney: as the principle of waterford high said, he was a hard worker at school but when he got into the service i think that was a place he felt he could really make his mark. he joined the army in 2004, deployed twice to afghanistan, the first tour in december, 2008, and returned again this year in march before he perished a few weeks ago. his passing reminds us of the sacrifices that have been made and continue to be made by our military overseas. last thursday, the day before veterans day, there was a huge outpouring of support of watersford town people who lined the streets, who knew him, his mother, his brother, and many who did not, but who wanted to pay rbt for his sacrifice and service. i ask my colleagues to join them in honoring r.e. colors' life and service to our nation and send our condolences to his family. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise

and extend reason. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized -- revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. dold: madam speaker, i rise today to congratulate sandy pearl for receiving the a.j.c.'s prestigious judge learn at hand human relations reward. the learn had in hand reward is presented to leaders in the legal profession, displaying the highest principles and ideals of humanitarianism and betterment of the community. in both his professional and community activities, sandy pearl has shown that he carries on this proud tradition. a native of the 10th district of illinois, sandy has served in a number of leadership roles at his firm and is consistently recognized as one of the top lawyers in his industry. but what makes sandy stand out for this well-deserved recognition is his commitment to the civic and charitable causes. through his active leadership in organizations such as the jewish federation, the golden apple foundation that recognizes excellence in teaching, through his work on global issues with

the chicago chapter of the a.j.c., and with the american-israel public relations -- or public affairs committee, sandy has dedicated himself to improving his community and fighting for important causes worldwide. i want to congratulate my friend, sandy pearl, on this tremendous honor, the learn in hand award. with that i ye yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri rise? >> to address the house for one minute, revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. carnahan: thank you, madam speaker. it's been 45 weeks since the republican party took control of this house. and they still haven't passed a serious jobs bill. in fact, just the opposite. they've blocked proposals that would put millions back to work. to play political games while people are hurting, to attack the president's job instead of creating jobs. last week we honored those who have fought to protect our country. many of whom were returning to a tough job market. that's why this week my office

held a veterans job seminar in st. louis. when our trooped returned home, they deserve our promises kept. the american jobs act will get more than one million americans back to work. teachers, firefighters, police, construction workers, it will encourage small businesses to grow and hire. next week we'll celebrate thanksgiving. a holiday that brings families and communities together. and next week i hope those in this people's house who have so clearly lost touch will hear loud and clear from the people they represent and come back with renewed focus do pull together to tackle the common challenges we face as a nation. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? >> request permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> madam speaker, i was pleased to see last week that the senate finally followed the house and passed one of our pro-growth bills but while repealing the 3% withholding tax is a step in the

right direction, it's not enough. we've sent in more than 20 other bills, each of which would stimulate job creation and a pro-growth environment. these aren't ideological bills, they're commonsense pieces of legislation that were passed with bipartisan support. mr. hultgren: they would get government bureaucrats off the backs of small businesses and enable the private sector to invest and grow their businesses, putting americans back to work and getting our economy moving again. i hope the senate will listen to the american people and pass the 20 bills that we've sent to them. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. sires: madam speaker, i rise today to express my deep concern about the closure of post offices across this country. for decades the post office has sustained and created american jobs in every corner of this country. closing these vital institutions will not only hurt our economy,

it will devastate american families who rely on these jobs. the closing of thousands of post offices will adversely effect minorities who live in low income neighborhoods, the elderly, who need the post office that is walking distance to send letters to their family, and small business owners who use the u.s. postal service as way to conduct business. rural communities, the hardest hit by the economy down jrn turn, will -- downturn, will see the greatest number of closures, causing communities to further suffer. 10,000 of the smallest post offices were closed, the postal service would only save 1% of its total yearly budget. furthermore, the united states postal service branch closing would mean that roughly 5,000 postal employees will lose their jobs. if we're serious about economic recovery, we must save post offices that provide jobs to thoses -- thousands of americans and make the necessary reforms to save our postal service. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one

minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> madam speaker, i have breaking news for president obama and senate democrats. house republicans have passed more than 20 bills that would create much-needed jobs but the democrat-controlled senate won't even consider them. the hardworking people of eastern and southeastern ohio are ready to get back to work. mr. johnson: if nkt -- in fact, they've been ready. so i'm serious about creath and protecting jobs now. that's why i was proud to introduce the coal miner employment and domestic energy infrastructure protection act, preventing the obama administration from enacting more job-killing regulations. this administration's war on american coal industry will be devastating to ohio. up to 27,000 direct and indirect coal jobs are at risk from the administration's proposed rewrite of the stream buffer zone rule and that's just one regulation. this bill is part of the house republican jobs plan that you

can find at jobs.gop.gov and i urge the senate to get to work and pass these important bills now. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rires? -- rise? ms. sanchez: address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. sanchez: thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to recognize mr. daniel foster, the recipient of a civil star, and a purple heart, and a veteran of both iraq and afghanistan. however, he has waited more than one year to receive his benefits that he both deserves and has earned because the department of veterans affairs has lost his benefit application. over and over and over. person by person. as a result of this carelessness with mr. foster's files, he was unable to rereceive his v.a.

benefit checks for the last year and was not able to pay the mortgage on his disabled father's home in california where he resides with his father. and now the home is scheduled to be foreclosed on november 23, the day before thanksgiving. since mr. foster does not reside in my district, he came and asked for help, i am happy to say that representative rohrabacher backer, mr. foster's -- representative rohrabacher, mr. foster's representative, has now been acased on his behalf. but as a member of the armed services committee, i work every day to ensure that our veterans receive the benefits they need and deserve. so i'll continue to follow mr. foster's case and encourage veterans in my district that are experiencing these types of difficulties to please contact us at our garden grove office. thank you and yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you, madam speaker. it's my honor to recognize the corpus christi veterans band under the direction of rahm chavez by being awarded at vow cat of the year. the corpus christi veterans band performs all around the coastal bend to honor and pay tribute to the troops and veterans. the band has been performing for over 20 years at various ceremonies, resppingses, tributes, and funerals, and demonstrated sincere dedication to honoring south texas veterans. mr. farenthold: their flag ceremony is one of the most moving i have attended. the members of the band personally fund their group to remind americans of the courage and sacrifices that our service men and women make to keep this great nation free. their constant dedication and support of our veterans, our community, and our nation is one that every american can learn from. i'm proud to represent such a

fine group of american patriots. the corpus christi veterans band. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from connecticut rise? the gentleman virginia tech. mr. himes: madam speaker, under pressure from the american people, the republican majority in this house is running around with 15 or 20 bills they claim to be jobs bills. which of course they are not. if you look at them, you will see that they are bills that allow polluters to dirty our waters and to fill our air with toxins. now, the bureau of labor statistics, which actually studies this stuff, asks employers why are you not hiring, why have you gotten rid of people? nowhere in those answers do we hear the word too much regulation? it's a kennard, john bartlett, conservative economist member of the reagan administration said the republican party is taking advantage of the need for jobs to push a deregulatory agenda. it is time to get serious about

jobs and not try to fool the american people that filling our water with toxins and making our air polluted is somehow good for this country or good for jobs. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcdermott: madam speaker, eight days from now it's thanksgiving. we are all going to sit down to a nice plump turkey and enjoy ourselves. well, not everybody. all across this nation we are seeing people protest. there are young people, middle-aged people, or older people. even parents with kids and these folks are mad. they are seeing wall street companies profit after getting us into the economic mess we have and at the same time they are among the millions of people in this country who are unemployed that are still without a job. there are four people looking for every job out there.

it's not easy. and congress? the republicans are sitting on their hands again. we are coming up to the end of the year. i want my republican colleagues to take notice. if you continue to push the unemployed and struggling americans instead of focusing and focus on tax breaks for the wealthy and corporations, the occupy movement will be in your districts on your door steps next november. unemployment benefits should be extended immediately. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? >> to address the house for one minute. and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i rise today in support of h.r. 3345 an act to continue the current federal unemployment programs through next year. if congress doesn't act by the end of the year, americans who have lost their jobs through no

fault of their own will begin losing their unemployment benefits in january. mr. peters: tens of thousands of michiganders will lose their benefits by february. these benefits are their lifeline for necessities like groceries, utilities, and rent or mortgage payments. once these families can no longer pay for basic necessities, it will create a ripple effect costing nearly a million u.s. jobs nationwide. poverty is at its highest level since 1993 and middle class household incomes are at their lowest level since 199p. -- 1997. unemployment benefits have kept over three million americans, including one million children, out of poverty last year. and now the republicans are willing to let these necessary benefits expire. madam speaker, as we approach the holiday season and million of americans are worried about paying their rent, i urge my colleagues to support this bill and keep millions of americans out of poverty. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york rise?

mr. rangel: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. rangel: my colleagues, some of you may have read that the protesters at wall street are now being subjected to attacks by the police and law enforcement for loitering and other violations. there is no question in anyone's mind that the right to free speech has restrictions and it's not an open end. and we have to be considerate of the people that are adversely affected. but there is also a moral issue in addition to the constitutional issue. that no one can challenge that these protesters has brought to the attention of the american people and that is the fact that we have a moral obligation to take care of those people who are vulnerable. take care of those people who are sick. take care of the people who are aged and our children not just before birth but after birth.

the fact that we are talking about turning these questions over to 12 members of congress, it's not just unconstitutional, it is immoral. and so i'm calling on the spiritual leaders of our country, don't leave this vacuum. bring in with catholic and protestants and all the religious to say there is something wrong with the formula that we have for the poor. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise. >> permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. lewis: madam speaker, recently atlanta magazine gave a voice to the jobless in america. the words of one person speaks for millions. unemployment dehumanized the person, one american writes, you lose their essence of your identity and value.

you become a number, a label, a resume, a failure. a defect. desperate, poor. and separated from society. the unemployed is to be silent, disrespected, on par with being homeless, mentally ill, or addicted. today we speak for millions of americans who will be pushed to the edges of our society, locked out and left behind if we fail to act. the jobless in america elected us so that we will have a voice. they will have a voice in these debates. they are not points on a graph. or numbers on a page. they are human beings. we must not abandon people of this nation. we must pass the unemployment insurance extension and do it without delay. wake up, congress. wake up and do what is right. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i ask consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. doggett: as families gather this next week for thanksgiving, some six million americans will be left wondering whether they will be able to secure a job before their federal unemployment coverage expires. they are people like jesse, a retired navy veteran in san antonio, who has applied for over 300 jobs unsuccessfully. sadly some republicans continue to blame the unemployment problem on the unemployed even though there are about four people for every job opening in america today. too many remain jobless not for lack of wanting to work, but for a lack of work. let's continue to encourage more job creation, but for those who lack a job, we also must preserve the lifeline of extnded unemployment benefits. it's only the turkey that ought

to be carved at thanksgiving. not the unemployed's ability to share in the bounty of america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? the gentleman is recognized. >> madam speaker, today the house considers the national right to carry reciprocity act. mr. altmire: i'm a proud co-sponsor of this bill because it will protect americans' second amendment rights by allowing citizens who have a valid permit to carry a firearm in any state in the country with the concealed carry law. the second amendment applies to law-abiding citizens all across america and this reciprocity act will protect americans' rights as they travel throughout the country. law-abiding citizens in western pennsylvania should be allowed to exercise their constitutional rights even when they leave the commonwealth's borders. all americans have an individual right to bear arms that is

protected by the constitution. i urge my colleagues to support this second amendment and vote for the national right to carry reciprocity act. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island rise? mr. langevin: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. langevin: madam speaker, i first of all want to join with my colleague from rhode island, mr. cicilline, in extending my condolences to the family of julie michaelson, former attorney general of rhode island, dedicated public servant, someone who truly made a difference to the people of our state. he made a difference and he will be greatly missed. mr. speaker, next week americans will be celebrating thanksgiving with their families. unfortunately, far too many will also be preoccupied with the uncertainty of being unemployed and finding ways just to put food on the table. our country currently has a 9% unemployment rate and there are

four unemployed workers for every open job right now. in my home state of rhode island, our unemployment rate continues to hold steady above the national average at 10.5%. mr. speaker, where is the urgency on job creation? the house just returned from its 11th scheduled recess of the year. with only 45 days left until the end of the year, the republican-led house has failed to take any meaningful action to spur job creation this year. mr. speaker, our constituents deserve better than this. the american people are demanding more than that. congress must put politics aside and focus on growing our economy and creating new job opportunities and getting this country back on track. it is our obligation to do this and we need to do it now. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? >> to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized.

mr. clarke: thank you, madam speaker. i'm very concerned about reports that the city of detroit may be running out of money as early as april of next year. one of the problems that detroit is facing is too many of our tax dollars are going to pay off debt owed by the city and owed by the schools. at the very time we need to put more police officers, more firefighters, more emergency medical providers on the street. at a time where we need to hire more schoolteachers and open more schools that will truly educate and graduate our young people. that's why i'm urging this congress, this house specifically, to adopt the detroit jobs trust fund. and i want to thank you personally, madam speaker, for the leadership and vision in supporting this legislation which would allow federal tax dollars paid by detroiters to be

invested in detroit, invested to cut taxes, make our streets safer, and our schools stronger. this will not only help put detroiters back to work, it will help our country. because when you rebuild detroit, you renew america. i yield my time back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the house will stand in recess subject to the call of the chair. court when

they take up health you will see a link right at the top that provides the letter that we sent yesterday. for the letter that we sent yesterday to the justices. we will read a little bit to set up this morning. the court's decision to settle

5.5 hours in the significance of this case. we ask that the court for the reflect this particular case of significance by supplementing your end of week audio cassette policy with live tv coverage. -- by supplementing or end of week audio policy with live tv coverage. additionally, up 5.5 our argument biggs for camera coverage come interested citizens would be understandably challenge to adequately polyol -- follow audio-only coverage of an event of this link with all of the justices in various council participants. and for these reasons we ask you and your colleagues to set aside any misgivings you have about television in the court room in general of permit cameras to televise live at this particular argument. so we'll wait word on whether we

can coverage the oral argument on health care. we will get to your calls in a couple of moments. first, tony mauro. good morning. explain for us, remind us about the rules that the court currently has regarding media coverage. guest: the court currently just allows pencil press you might say, reporters that are about to but notes and the courin the c, cameras or microphones allowed at all. they never have been, and some people think they may never be allowed, but brian lamb, i think, is moving the ball ahead, and we will see what happens on that. host: what has been the argument from the court over the years? guest: a number of arguments.

one is the justices are very and amennoyimity.an amenit they believe it helps their security. they believe if they were more exposed on television they would have to have bodyguards all of the time. the other is they believe the supreme court is unlike any other institution, unlike state courts, which just judges are elected. the supreme court views itself as a political, and not required to be as accountable in the same sense of allowing broadcast coverage of the proceedings. i have argued for many years

that that argument is completely backwards. i think if anything the supreme court's unique status as an unelected branch makes it more eligible for camera coverage. it will not be really affected by the cameras in the way that politicians often are. those are the main arguments. they also believe it cameras are allowed an oral arguments, it will somehow change the dynamics. that lawyers will grandstand, play to the cameras and not answered the justices' questions. that too, i think, is a weak argument. i have talked to many lawyers who say that within one minute of starting their arguments they

forget about the cameras and focus on the task at hand, which is answering the judge's questions. host: in a case like this where our letter has gone up to the court, is there a process, or what can you tell us about the response? is the decision solely with the chief justice? guest: no, i would not say so. i think a request like this will be taken seriously and be discussed in the entire conference. the conference is the word they discussing asourt disgustin whole, rather than the chief justice being the decision maker. i think it will take the lead or cue from the chief justice, but they will discuss it, and probably within a few weeks you

will have a response. host: far there any of the current justices who have opened their window in their own way to camera coverage? any individual were marks they want to put out there? -- remakrs they want to pu out rks they want to put out there? guest: as you might expect, it is the newer justices. believes it willaken put the supreme court and positive light. i agree with that. having watched many arguments myself, they show the world, they show spectators that the

court is a very serious institution and tries to get it right. domayor has saidight your han similar things. the court allow limited television coverage of some of its proceedings, and she said it was not a problem for her to be at a televised argument, and she thought it was a good thing. host: think you also a debate this afternoon on a bill that would allow gun owners with proper permits to carry firearms across state lines. an hour of general debate and 10 amendment to be considered. we'll have live house coverage when they gavel back in. earlier today on capitol hill, steny hoyer, democratic leader,

and representative mike simpson, republican, led some 40 other republicans and democrats on a news conference calling on the supercommittee, the joint deficit reduction committee, to go well beyond the mandate of $1.2 trillion of saving over the next 10 years. we're going to show you as much of their news conference as we can, as we wait for the house to gavel back in. >> he's never been brief. >> thank you all for coming this morning. we have with us today, come in.

your words will be heard. >> thank you. i appreciate that very much. >> thank you all for coming this morning. we have here a bipartisan and bicameral group of legislators that have been dubbed the go big coalition. that have been urging, as i'm viewer you're all awaur, the supercommittee to go big. we all believe it needs to do that, if we're going to stabilize the debt in this country, and start paying down our debt. and we want to encourage the supercommittee, although there's just a week left before they have to report, this is not rocket science, they can do this. they can get -- they go go big and help us solve this problem. so, we want them to know that there's a bipartisan group of legislators on both sides of the aisle and on both ends of the capitol that want to work on this and want to make the tough votes that are necessary to get us out of the situation we are currently. in we're going to have a few speakers this morning, i'm going to reserve my remarks because i have some other people that would like to speak. go ahead, steny. >> thank you very much, speaker

simpson. [laughter] >> that was history. history. >> ladies and gentlemen, mike simpson from idaho. former speaker of the idaho house. he and i had a relationship because i was president of the maryland senate and we started a relationship early in his career. not in mine, because i'd been here some time. >> i wasn't alive. [laughter] >> oh, that was bad. that was bad. [laughter] >> this is the kind of comment that undermines cooperation in the congress of the united states. [laughter] mike simpson's been my p and g partner, along with heath shuler and others, chandler happens to be my paternity brother. we've been good friends. the public doesn't believe that we have good friends across the aisle. that's into the accurate. nor do they believe we can work

across the aisle. we're here today to say, we must work across the aisle in both houses to get this country on the right track. last year then chairman of the joint chiefs, admiral mike mullen, said that, and i quote, our national debt is our biggest national security threat. that is why we all stand here on this podium. republicans, democrats, house members, senate members. we must do something to start paying down the debt and that's thank something is in the hands of the joint select committee on deficit reduction. two weeks ago a number of us from the house, some 100 democrats and republicans, stood together to send a message that we want the joint select committee to send as you deal that is big. about $4 trillion in deficit reduction. and is accompanied -- accomplished through a balanced mix of reductions in mandstory expenditures and additional revenues. mike simpson said, when we had

that press conference, it cannot be done any other way. today we return and are joined by senators from parties who share our concern about deficits and agree that committee members , for the sake of our country and its sound fiscal future, should recommend a package of cuts, revenues and reforms consistent with the simpson-bowles and gang of six proposals. we have the greatest chance, we've seen in a generation, to strike a bold agreement that will move us forward on a sustainable fiscal path and spur economic recovery. to do so, of course, as we have all seen, is not easy. and we recognize the pressures committee members are facing from multiple directions. but we want them to know that there is a large and significant number of us in both chambers who want such a deal and are ready to give it a fair shot. that is why we are standing together today, democrats and

republicans, united. to send a message of urgency and support. more than 100 of us in the house, split nearly evenly between parties, have already sent a letter to that effect. none of us, none of us want to risk the immediate and long-term effects of sequestration that it will bring if the committee fails in its task. sequestration is not a worth while option. at risk is more than just the economic impact but also the trust, the -- the trust the american people have in their government to solve the most pressing problems we face as a nation. i want to thank all my colleagues, senate, house republicans and democrats. i want to thank all the senate house members who have come together to send the message that the seriousness of the debt challenge can only be met with an equally serious and bipartisan determination to do what needs to be done, to do

what the american people expect of us. and i'll now yield to my friend, saxby chandler. >> well, thanks, steny. let me just say to shuler and simpson, as well as my good friend, steny hoyer, how much we appreciate their leadership and their willingness to step up and show their support along with all of our colleagues in the united states senate who have committed to say to the supercommittee, the right thing to do is to go big. go big may mean $3 trillion, it may mean $4 trillion, it may mean $5 trillion, it may mean $6 trillion to some people, but if we don't get to that level of deficit reduction, then we are not showing to the world marketplace, to americans and to other people around the world who are watching closely what's happening in the united states congress today and over the next congress today and over the next week, that we are serious