doc-fix. guest: they will never get rid of that. the biggest driver of this debt, is medicare. we said to take $400 billion. it doesn't matter if the call obamacare or else presleyvis presley-care. it doesn't matter. we take care of pre-existing conditions was somebody three years old, when a guy can get a heart operation and doesn't get a bill. who's kidding who? you have to do tort reform. you have to tell hospitals to keep one set of books instead of two.

host: the house is about to come and. do think our country's best days are ahead of us? guest: i think they are ahead of us. the american people are smarter than the politicians. the cd stupidity -- they see the stupidity. if you spend -- will borrow money to more and through the year. who is getting new/ who? host: that will be the last word. this is all available on c- span's video library, c- span.org. lots more in the book, "shooting from the lip -- the life of senator al simpson."

thank you for being at our table this morning. guest: this is the place that america get some knowledge. host: you have a great weekend. chaplain conroy: let us pray. almighty god of the universe we give you thanks for giving us another day. we pray for your gift of wisdom to all with great responsibility in this house for the leadership of our nation. may all the members have the vision of a world where we -- where respect and understanding is the marks of civility and honor and integrity are the marks of one's character. as members take time in the coming week for constituency visits, give them the ability to hear the voices of all in their districts so that when they return they are focused on

the important work to be done. bless us this day and every day and may all that is done within these hallowed halls be for your greater honor and demrory. amen. -- glory. amen. the speaker: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota rise? >> mr. speaker, pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the gentleman from minnesota. >> mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present and i make a point of order that a quorum is not present. the speaker: further proceedings -- pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this question are postponed. the pledge of allegiance today will be led by the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. altmire. mr. altmire: i pledge allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god,

indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker: the chair will entertain up to five requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. wilson: mr. speaker i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker: without objection, so ordered. mr. wilson: mr. speaker, earlier this week a gallup poll was released which sadly stated that 85% of small business owners surveyed were not looking for new employees. 66% cite the economic recession. 48% blame rising health care cost due to the government takeover health care bill. and 40% are worried about new government regulations. these statistics show that the president's policies are failing america's small business owners. the president continues to support policies that are destroying jobs. according to f.i.b., obamacare

alone will destroy six million jobs. over the past year, house republicans have passed dozens of legislation to allow small business owners to gain confidence to begin hiring again. i urge my colleagues in the liberal-controlled senate and the president to support these initiatives and help put american families back to work. in conclusion, god bless our troops and we will never forget september 11 and the global war on terrorism. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized. mr. altmire: every year around this time the president submits a budget. the house and senate debate their own budgets and well, nothing happens. congress has not adopted a budget in over 1,000 days and it's been 15 years since congress passed all of its appropriations bills on time. this is simply unacceptable. and that's why i ask my colleagues to join me and the

bipartisan co-sponsors of the no budget, no pay act. this bill is simple. it says if congress can't complete its work, if the budget and appropriation bills are not done on time then congressional pay would cease and members of congress would not be paid until those bills are enacted. members could not receive their lost salaries retroactively once pay is withheld it's gone forever. if this bill were law, members would find urgency and finally find a way to get its work done on time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. johnson: i rise today in support of freedom and liberty. the basic principles our country was founded upon. it's a sad day for america when

our president infringing upon our religious right, a fundamental right protected in the first amendment. the president announced he will make a so-called accommodation on the obamacare rule requiring religiously affiliated organizations to offer insurance plans that cover contraception. even though the president slightly backtracked his attack on religious freedom, he did not go far enough. the new rule still mandates that religious organizations with moral objections will be forced to act against their religious beliefs. this is not about health care. it's about our rights under the first amendment. and this is yet another example of why we must repeal obamacare in its entirety, adhere to the basic tenants of the constitution and stop the administration's severe overreach. the sooner we repeal obamacare the sooner we restore freedom and liberty to all americans.

i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from vermont rise? mr. welch: to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. welch: thank you, madam speaker. i want to talk about two wonderful vermonters. francis and tokato. they met 20 years ago. takato studying english. she returned to japan but stayed in touch with francis eventually takato returned to the u.s. and she and francis married. quite a love story. now francis and takato face their biggish challenge yet. takato is being threatened with deportation. francis and takato is a same-sex couple. it is recognized in vermont but not recognized under federal law. without that recognition, francis and takato are not

eligible for the same immigration benefits as other married couples. madam speaker, these are good people. they have a good relationship. they're good vermonters. they deserve better. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> madam speaker from the 1099 provision to the hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts to medicare it's clear that president obama's health care law is bad medicine for america. the recent ruling by the department of health and human services is the most egregious example of federal intrusion to date. i began hearing from citizens across michigan's first district. letters and emails came in by the hundreds with vast majority in opposition to the administration's position. mr. benishek: it's eft that many northern michiganners are upset with the blatant attack on religious freedom enshrined

in the first amendment. the opposition to this rule is not about access to contraception, as my friends on the other side of the aisle would have you believe. men and women can already access contraception at very low cost. the debate is over the fact that the new rule strikes at the fundamental beliefs of our democracy. the concept that the federal government can force people to pay for actions that violate the teachings of their faith goes against two centuries of american religious freedom. this action represents a very government overreach that the framers of our nation fought against and the reason the bill of rights was added to the constitution. mr. speaker, like most northern michigan citizens, i see the right to practice one's religion as a fundamental liberty and i intend to fight this action forever. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon rise? mr. defazio: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. defazio: are we going to take up legislation which is targeted to fix the

reimbursement for doctors which is absolutely essential to medicare that this threat should go away, we should make a permanent fix. let's not pretend we can keep dragging this on without jeopardizing seniors. unemployment, we need to extend that for people who can't find work, they lost their job through no fault of their own, they need to find a job, we need to help them out. but borrowing $100 billion from the social security trust fund under the premise that this consumer spending generated will bring about economic recovery and create jobs, that's the larry sommer principle from the stimulus era, look, that doesn't work. you want to create jobs, you want to borrow $100 billion, let's borrow $100 billion, finance the transportation bill that the republicans pulled from the floor this week and put a few million people back to work rebuilding the crumbling infrastructure with

all-american made goods. that's the way to get this economy back on track, not the social security tax cuts. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota rise? without objection, the gentleman is recognized. >> madam speaker, for most americans, our busy lives make it difficult to reflect as often as we should upon the incredible sacrifices made by those heroes who have answered the call to service our nation's history. today i'd like to honor the service of one such hero from my home state of minnesota. minnesota native, lieutenant john flew mission in all the major battles in europe. mr. paulsen: he flew in strategic spots in europe over enemy lines and flew supplies during the battle of the bulge. john has been awarded seven bronze stars on wednesday this past wednesday he received the

highest recognition and honor, the legion of honor. madam speaker, john epitomizes what it means to be a hero. i want to thank him for his service and congratulate him on an honor thatess much deserved. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from delaware rise? mr. carney: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. carney: i rise today to encourage my colleagues to support bipartisan legislation to create jobs. in december, congressman steven fincher and i introduced h.r. 3606 the reopening american capital markets to emerging growth companies act of 2011. our legislation will create jobs by making it easier for companies to undertake an i.p.o. 90% of a company's growth occurs after they go public. unfortunately in recent years the number of companies going public has fallen dramatically. this legislation will reduce the cost of going public for emerging growth companies by phasing in certain costly

regulatory requirements. last night our legislation passed out of the financial services committee with a bipartisan vote of 54-1. we've worked hard to craft this legislation in a way that can pass both the house and the senate and be signed by the president. please join me in supporting this bipartisan legislation that will create jobs and grow the economy. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. smith: madam speaker according to a pew research center survey conducted last month, more viewers feel the national media are biased than ever before. the survey found that 67% of americans say there is a fair amount or a great deal of bias in news coverage. only 10% responded that there is no bias at all in the national media. these percentages show a significant increase in the number of americans who believe

they receive bias coverage of current events by the national media. the national media owe it to the american people to be honest and fair. americans distrust to the national media will continue to grow until the media adhere to the highest standards of their profession and provide the american people with facts, balanced stories and objective coverage of the news. . 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: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. kosta: madam speaker, i rise -- mr. costa: i rise today to talk about the housing crieses facing americans, in california we know firsthand the pain the housing crisis has caused our families and communities as foreclosure rates continue to whoever well -- hoverle with above the national average. it's not the wholesale

systematic change to put our housing market back on solid ground. homeowners are tired of waiting for meaningful change and tweaks are not enough. enacting the home act and the homeowners bill of rights would go a long ways towards stabilizing the market now and leveling the playing field for the future. we know it's essential to get our economy back on track. restoring economic security starts with passing meaningful policies that rebuild the foundation of our communities and the american home. after all, the american home is the single largest investment that the average american family makes in their lifetime. it's part and parcel of the american dream and the foundation of america's middle class. i yield the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? >> thank you madam speaker. mr. scott: by direction of the committee on rules i call up house resolution 554 an ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the

resolution. the clerk: has calendar number -- house calendar number 113 house resolution 554, resolved that upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to qur the conference report to accompany the bill, h.r. 3630, to provide incentives for the creation of jobs and for other purposes. all points of order against the conference report and against its consideration are waived. the conference report shall be considered as read. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the conference report to its adoption without intervening motion except one, one hour of debate and, two, one motion to recommit if applicable. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for one hour. mr. scott: thank you, madam speaker. for the purpose of debate only, i yield the customary 0 minutes to the gentleman from florida, mr. hastings, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. during consideration of this resolution all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.

madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. scott: thank you. house resolution 554 provides for consideration of the conference report on h.r. 3630, a bill to extend payroll tax deduction, protect medicare payments for doctors, and begin responsible reform of the unemployment benefit system. madam speaker, i rise today in support of this resolution. today we are taking up legislation that does three things. extend the payroll tax deduction, reform our unemployment benefit system, and protect medicare payments for doctors. first, on the bright side, republicans and democrats were able to find a compromise to pay for two very important things. much needed reforms to the unemployment benefits program, and protect medicare payments to physicians which serve our seniors. in regards to the payroll tax deduction, unfortunately our

friends on the left did not think it was important to pay for the extension. spending without making the proper adjustments is a notion i am not fond of. my voting record makes no secret of that. this is what makes this vote so difficult today. you cannot always get, aketly -- exactly what you want, but today i applaud both sides for attempting to get fairly close to it. we cannot continue to pay unemployment benefits for 99 weeks indefinitely. we cannot allow payments to our doctors to be affected. as that will only turn around and affect the care available to those in need. we cannot raise taxes on american families. by voting for this bill, we are signaling it is time to move forward plain and simple. once again madam speaker, i rise in support of this rule. i encourage my colleagues to vote yes on the rule and i

reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: madam speaker i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: madam speaker, i thank my good friend from south carolina for yielding me time. millions of americans all across this country are struggling and they need our help. what they don't need is more republican gamesmanship at their expense. the democrats have literally force the -- forced the republicans to realize they can't just take a policy measures that help the rich while taking away from the poor. i may support this bill in light of the fact that it will give a payroll tax cut to 160 million americans. it also extends unemployment

insurance for those americans who have left their jobs through no fault of their own. and it will allow seniors access to their physicians under medicare. a footnote there we really should do the doc fix permanently and stop piece meeling and playing games with this particular measure. the bill is not perfect. the pay for is nowhere near perfect. and the length of the extension is not perfect, but it does contain critical provisions that many democrats negotiated to keep in the bill. while we were able to compromise today, i do not think that my republican friends deserve too much credit. so they regain the majority, the american people have seen firsthand their obstructionist policies by their actions.

in fact, earlier this week my friends on the right attempted to bring to the floor a transportation bill so flawed that mine and others former colleague and transportation secretary and good friend of mine, ray lahood, stated this is the most partisan transportation bill i have ever seen and it is also anti-safety and it hollows out our number one priority which is safety. it's the worst transportation bill i have ever seen during 35 years of public service. the american people want a government that understands the challenges that they face daily. republicans want an economy that works great for the greediest. and leaves the neediest out in the cold.

just ask a firefighter in pompano beach they'll tell you an extra $1,000 in their pockets makes a huge difference in putting food on the table, gas in the car, and being able to stay in their homes. we have been forced to strike this compromise because for decades republicans have published policies that favor the wealthy. we should not forget that while we are debating how to pay for this payroll tax cut unemployment insurance, and payments to medicare physicians, our nation's massive deficits are doing large -- are due in large part to republican tax cuts for the wealthiest in america. the fact of the matter is that the wealthy have continued to pay less and less taxes in the 1980's president ronald reagan started to lower tax rates. and then president george w. bush slashed capital gains and

income tax rates for the wealthy to the now historic lows. as i travel throughout the constituency that i'm privileged to represent into areas where the unemployment rate in someplaces in the glades is 40% i ask myself who is actually benefiting from these tax cuts for the rich? it's certainly not the police officer living in boynton, or the nurse working at the v.a. hospital of a community health center in west palm beach. madam speaker, while i'm pleased we have come to a compromise to extend unemployment insurance, i remain deeply concerned that this bill reduces benefits from 99 weeks to as little as 73 weeks through december. i hear daily from constituents who are approaching the end of their unemployment period and are at a loss as to where to

turn next. although the economy may be starting to recover, what are we supposed to tell those people who have been looking for a job for months and months on end? what kind of compromise are they supposed to strike with unemployment? the best way to reduce the deficit is to put money into the hands of people who spend it. this is how we support our communities. if we invest more money in main street consumers will have more money this their pockets to spend on putting food on the table, gas on their cars and as i said, be able to stay in their homes. every american should have the opportunity to succeed opportunity should not be limited by geography, race, gender, or the size of one's bank account. yet thanks to massive gaps in the tax code, the rich get richer, and the poor get poorer,

the top 1% of earners are responsible for 20% of the nation's annual income up from 10% in 1981. the wealthiest c.e.o.'s are paid 400 times what the average worker earns. only 30 years ago it was 20 times as much. americans in the highest tax bracket are supposed to pay 35% of their income taxes. however since president bush slashed the capital gains rate to 15%, the top 400 wealthiest that we continue to identify, for example pay only 15% in taxes on 80% of their income. as the law is currently written any wealthy american paying the full 35% needs to get a new accountant.

in addition to reducing the term of unemployment insurance coverage, this bill raises an additional $15 billion by requiring federal employees to contribute a larger amount to their retirement accounts. my understanding is this is the grandfathered measure that will protect the ones that our federal -- that are federal workers now, but i'm not sure this is going to satisfy members on either the right or left or the democrats or republicans in this measure since it's addressing federal employees. and there were other ways to get to that $15 billion. federal employees are currently in their second year of a pay freeze. while my colleagues across the aisle only a few weeks ago voted to freeze federal employee pay for a third year. republicans don't think twice about limiting federal workers' ability to support their families, but are more than willing to shut down the government when bankers are

asked to pay their fair share of taxes on their bonuses. how much can we continue to pick on federal workers? they are not fat cats. they are postal workers receptioningses, janitors, teachers nurses, social workers, and police officers to name a few that are the fundamental underpinning of this nation. how much can we continue to pile on their backs? we have already broken their bank accounts. how much weight should the wealthiest american who can afford it carry? investing in america is how we are going to create jobs. let's build the infrastructure for the coming era of green energy. let's fix our aging highways and bridges, please. let's adequately fund our schools so our children can get a good education and can compete on a global level. doing these kinds of things today will create a brighter

america for generations to come. with that, madam speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: thank you, madam speaker. my good friend on the left, mr. hastings talks a hot about taxes this morning. it's an appropriate conversation to have. i will say however that as we exam the facts around the capital gains tax let us not forget president clinton lowered the capital gains action from 28% to 20%. but we also have to keep in mind that the most tax driven piece of legislation in the last three or four years is, in fact, the folks on the left and the national health care reform. a $500 billion increase of taxes and fees on the middle class. let us not get lost on the fact that those on the left continue to find ways to tax the middle

class. when i think about the notion we are going to have a conversation about taxation, it gets me excited. i'm looking forward to this opportunity to debate this. the worthiness of the payroll tax deduction and how both sides have come together. this is a good thing. we have found some common ground on the issue of the payroll tax. but what we will not find common ground is on the issue of slicing taxes for the middle class. my friends on the left they talk a good game, but they don't walk the talk, because we look at the national health care program, you must concede that $500 billion of new taxes is a bit much for the middle class. you must say that the surtax on i vestment income, another $123 billion to start 11 months from now, that is a pain for the middle class. . it's a pain for the middle class. excise tax on comprehensive health insurance plans $35

billion, just a few years away. think about the hike on medicare another payroll tax $86 billion of new taxes starting another 11 months. my friends on the left, they seem to have this concept that if we just wait a little while, the american people will forget who in fact are raising the taxes on the middle class. i would say that my good friend from georgia wants to chime in on the debate so i will yield, madam speaker, three minutes to the gentleman from georgia, mr. phil gingrey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for three minutes. mr. gingrey: thank you, madam speaker. and i do rise in support of the rule and of course, i want to thank my friend from south carolina for yielding me this time. while i am madam speaker, supporting the rule, i must also inform my colleagues that i will be opposing the underlying conference report. in december this house passed responsible legislation that

afforded a full year extension of the payroll tax holiday. it provided long overdue reforms to unemployment benefits, and of course, it mitigated the looming 24.4% physician reimbursement cut for two years so all seniors will still have access to medical care. most importantly, madam speaker, that fiscally prudent legislation was completely offset. my colleagues understand by that it was paid for with spending cuts. yet, when it came time for the other body to stand with us for the american people, it failed and it forced us into this two-month extension. and so here we are again. madam speaker, i thought that this approach was wrong then and i still believe that it is wrong now. while i am opposing the conference report, i do need to commend chairman camp for ensuring that necessary

unemployment insurance reforms stayed in the bill and i want to also commend chairman upton and walden for working diligently to include sensible spectrum option legislation as well as for their work to make sure that seniors at least through the end of this year, 10 months, have the ability to see their doctors. as a physician, i have and i will continue to fight for the long-term solution to eliminate this flawed s.g.r. system once and for all. however, despite these efforts, i cannot and i will not support legislation that extends the payroll tax holiday without paying for it. this will add $100 billion to the deficit and it will create an even greater shortfall within the social security trust fund that already has over $100 billion shortfall just in the last two years. and what is it $2.4 trillion

the government owes the trust fund that's not there just i.o.u.'s in a file drawer in west virginia. we did the right thing in december and i believe it's a travesty that we would now reverse that course. so madam speaker, make no mistake, i support tax relief for hardworking americans, but by reducing their marginal tax rates. but this legislation is simply an election year gimmick. it jeopardizes our already fragile social security system while literally tricking voters 160 million of them, with the hopes that they believe it's real tax relief. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. scott: i yield 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: 30 seconds. mr. gingrey: i thank the gentleman. madam speaker, we can do better. we can do better. and quite frankly the american people deserve better. it's time to end all of these games, this smoke and mirrors

the bait and switch, the political gamesmanship all with the concern for this next election and to the detriment of this current and our future generations. for that reason, madam speaker, while i support the rule and i thank the gentleman for yielding, i will be voting heck no, against this conference report. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from south carolina reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: madam speaker, i'm very pleased to yield two minutes to my very good friend from california, the distinguished woman, ms. matsui, former member of the rules committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for two minutes. ms. matsui: i like to thank the gentleman for yielding me time. madam speaker, this will ensure that 160 million americans will not see a tax increase at a time when so many families are still struggling to make ends meet. the payroll tax cut provides

american families an average of $1,000 annually to help pay their bills and for day-to-day necessary its. i'm also pleased that this agreement will he extend unemployment insurance. with the unemployment numbers in my district over 12% continued unemployment benefits are important for so many to make ends meet while still trying to find work. additionally providing for medicare physician payment fix will ensure seniors will continue access to care. i do urge my colleagues to continue working for a longtime solution to this critical issue, and i'm supportive of the provisions in this bill which will finally provide public safety with a nationwide interoperability network and ensure a path toward american innovation. however, madam speaker, i do have reservations about other ways that this package is paid for. the second largest job provider in my district behind the state government is the health care sector employing nearly 30,000

workers. the medicare bad debt reductions in this bill will seriously hamper the health systems in my district. for example, u.c.-davis medical center will lose over $4 in the next four years. additionally, i am disappointed with the cuts in the prevention of public health fund which was included in the affordable care act as a best way to improve public health. while passage of this bill is critical to america's middle class, unemployed and seniors i have strong concerns that it should not be at the expense of our country's health care and federal work force. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: thank you madam speaker. i yield to the gentleman from california, chairman david dreier such time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for as much time as

he may consume. mr. dreier: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. dreier: thank you, madam speaker. first i rise to congratulate my friend from north charleston a hardworking committee of the rules committee for his stellar work on this rule. and a pretty good job is being done by my friend from fort lauderdale, i must say. madam speaker, i will say i listened to the opening statement of my colleague from fort lauderdale, and as he talked about the plight of those in florida, constituents of his who are struggling, i was thinking about the fact that today i deal with in excess of 14% unemployment rate in the area i represent in southern california. when i hear the stories all across this country of people who are suffering, it does resonate. it leaves me to say, madam speaker, why is it that we're here today? why is it that we are looking for an extension of unemployment benefits?

why is it that we are here looking for an extension of the payroll tax holiday? the reason is we have an abysmally low, unacceptable gross domestic product growth rate in this country. we have a g.d.p. growth rate which is not acceptable. yes, we've seen some positive signs. we are all gratified about that. i truly believe that the positive signs that we have seen are in spite of not because of anything that's come from washington, d.c. i mean years ago we passed the stimulus bill that was supposed to guarantee we wouldn't see an unemployment rate that would exceed 8%. we all know what has happened. we've seen a great deal of suffering. we've looked at the 82% increase in nondefense discretionary spending that took place in the four years leading up to our winning the majority. that didn't get our economy growing. the reason our economy is growing is that there is a great deal of innovation, creativity, diligence, hard

work on the part of our fellow americans, small business men and women, working americans who are working. that's the reason we are seeing these positive signs. now, if we did have pro-growth economic policies put into place, if we had those put into place, it's obvious we would not have to rely on an extension of unemployment benefits. we would not have to look to the extending the payroll tax holiday. we all know that the payroll tax is designed to specifically go to ensure that people who are retirees are able to have those benefits. so we are obviously undermining that. now, we all argue, certainly on our side that increasing taxes for anyone during slow economic times is not acceptable policy and that's the reason that we are doing what it is we are doing, supporting this measure. it's obviously something in a is essential because of the fact that we have not seen the

kind of g.d.p. growth rate that we can put into place. that's why i believe that after we move beyond this it is essential for us to do all that we can to implement the kinds of policies that will in fact spur the kind of incentive, create the kind of incentive that our job creators need, and there are a wide range of things that we have talked about. we all know what those are. i hope that we can come together in a bipartisan way to do just that. i congratulate my friend, dave camp and the other conferees, who have come to this agreement. it is acceptable to some of us. some of us are not enthusiastic. my friend from marietta a few minutes ago talked about the package that existed last december. that was good public policy. it ended up not being good poll -- politics. i'll accept that. that accepted what we are doing today, what the president requested that we would extend

this package for one year rather than just two months which is what we had to reluctantly agree to last december. i also have to say on the sustained growth rate issue, that is ensuring that hardworking doctors out there have the adequate compensation for their labors, we need to have major reform of the s.g.r. structure, and i think that what we've done today is a step in that direction and i hope very much we are going to be able to do that. so again i thank all my colleagues who have been involved in getting us to where we are. now that we are going to do this, it's essential that we move ahead with very positive pro-growth policies. with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: madam speaker, i'm very pleased to yield to my good friend from new jersey two minutes, mr. pallone. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. pallone: thank you. thank you, madam speaker. today's payroll tax conference

agreement will provide $1,000 in the pockets of more than 160 million americans and ensure that approximately 3.5 million americans will continue to benefit from much-needed unemployment insurance. we've also protected seniors' ability to see their doctors with an s.g.r. fix through the end of the year. despite these critical provisions though, this is a difficult vote to take. i'm greatly disappointed how these extensions are offsets. first, the unemployment extension is paid for on the backs of the hardworking middle-class individuals. they are not the reason for our nation's deficit. meanwhile, my republican colleagues refuse to require the wealthiest few to pay their fair share. secondly, the s.g.r. fix is being paid for by critical health care dollars. it slashes one of the most important progresses we have made in long-term health.

we will never address the real concerns of our health care system. sadly, the bill manages to cut from one provider hospitals and nursing homes to pay for another physician. we can't rob peter to pay paul, and our health care system can't sustain further provider cuts. meanwhile, there are still no permanent solution to an ongoing s.g.r. problem that can't continue to be kicked down the road. i will vote in favor of this bill but i will do so with reservations. i know on the democratic side our conferees fought for the best deal we could get. we need to vote for this bill because it does very important things but i also express my reservations. i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: thank you, madam speaker. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas mr. joe barton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. barton: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. barton: i want to thank the gentleman from south carolina for yielding.

i've been in the house, this is my 28th year, 14 years in the minority and now i'm in my 14th year in the majority. i don't believe i have ever voted against a rule when i was in the majority but i'm going to vote against this one. . i'm also going to vote against the underlying bill. i'm not saying anything disparaging about the leadership on both sides of the aisle and the leadership in both bodies, but we are taking money away from the social security trust fund and we are substituting an i.o.u. that may or may not ever be repaid. so on principle alone i think we should at least shoot straight with the american people. so i will vote no on the underlying bill. on the rule when we became the majority, we the republicans, we promised the american people

that we would be more open and more transparent than the previous majority that was headed by speaker pelosi. and one ever our pry

when a majority rule is up and i would hope that this is a one-time exception that we violate the principle that we promised when we became the majority. i thank the gentleman for yielding. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: madam speaker, i had hoped that ms. velazquez or mr. engel would be here but i'll say to my friend from south carolina, do you have other speakers? mr. scott: i do not at this point. mr. hastings: all right. then i'm in position to go forward. when the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance renewal came before the house just two months ago, my friends on the right refused to renew either provision while democrats tried to avert a tax hike on the middle class. . i believe republicans would rather let the payroll tax cut

expire and unemployment insurance run out than ask the wealthiest americans to pay their fair share. madam speaker, if it's at all possible i still have the time and with your permission i would like to yield two minutes to my colleague, mr. engel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. engel: thank you. i thank my good friend from florida. madam speaker, i rise in support of the legislation being considered today. however i really just need to say this is not the agreement i would have written. i recognize the importance of making sure our physicians don't receive a 27% pay cut and i have been very very vocal on the doc fix. it's something that is warranted, much needed, and fair and equitable. but i strongly oppose the cut in

dish funding to pay for this package. as a member of the health subcommittee of energy and commerce, we fought hard to have dish in the affordable health care act. and in my home city of new york city, teaching hospitals are very important and they help the people who are poor. that's why dish funding is so important. they'll always need -- we'll always need a safety net for hospitals to provide that safety net to our most vulnerable citizens. and cutting dish payments overwhelm makes the task harder. this will certainly have a harmful effect on my district. i really just have to say that. ultimately i'll vote for this agreement because at the time the great recession is finally showing signs of ebbing and the recovery is taking root, we cannot remove $1,000 from middle class taxpayers pockets and expect the recovery to continue. i am very glad that we will still have a payroll tax. i'm glad that democrats have been at the forefront of the president pushing for this

payroll tax cut. we need to do more to help the working people and middle class people in this country. not only the rich, the poor, the middle class, the working class people. they are the ones that need help and this bill is helping them today. i thank you. i thank my friend from florida. i yield back. mr. hastings: i'll close now and say again, madam speaker that i'm glad that this body was able to reach a compromise today. the unfortunate fact is the republican majority still seeks to implement policies that are unfairly favor the wealthy. let me identify some of those people. we would be be in the position of looking in the mirror. we do better than other people in our society and we ought to pay more in light of that. not just the top 400 but all of us that are doing better so that we don't fall into that category of not taking care of those who have the greatest needs.

it is time to stop playing politics with the livelihoods of those who have been hit the hardest. and need our help the most. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the rule. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from south carolina. mr. scott: thank you, madam speaker. it is time for us to move forward in this debate. the conference committee has done their job and brought us a compromise which is exactly what the american people have been asking for from congress, that is for us to work together. supporting the rule for the conference report signals that we are ready to finish this debate. and move on to the most pressing issue facing our nation today and that is creating the environment that creates jobs. madam speaker, i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. without objection, the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. all those in favor say aye. all those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the resolution is agreed to, and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from i michigan, mr. camp, seek recognition? mr. camp: pursuant to house resolution 554, i call up the conference report to accompany h.r. 3630 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 3630, an act to provide incentives for the

creation of jobs, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 554, the conference report is considered as read. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, and the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, will each control 30 minutes. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland rise? mr. hoyer: madam speaker, i would inquire of the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, whether or not he is opposed to the conference report? mr. levin: i support the conference report. mr. hoyer: madam speaker, i claim the time in opposition to the conference report. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 22, the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, the gentleman from michigan, mr. leffy, and the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer, will each control 20 minutes. the chair -- the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: thank you, madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks to the

conference report to accompany h.r. 3630. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. camp: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. camp: i come to the floor today in strong support of this conference report. as a result of a lot of long hours, hard work, and determination on both sides of the aisle and both sides of the capitol, this agreement shows the american people that congress can govern and washington can work. first and foremost, this legislation prevents a tax increase on 160 million americans. as a conservative, i look at the agreement and see some very big wins. chief among them are the most significant reforms to the federal unemployment program since it was created in the 1930's. all designated to promote re-employment and paychecks instead of unemployment and benefit checks. while extending unemployment benefits through the end of the year, this agreement creates a

national jobs search standard for the first time. covering benefits from beginning to end and requires every unemployed american to look for a job if they receive unemployment benefits. the agreement allows states to spend unemployment funds on paying people to work instead of just sending them a check while they are out of work. it ensures taxpayer funds are properly spend by -- spent by permitting drug testing under commonsense rules that help people get ready for a job. it expands work sharing programs to help avoid layoffs in the first place, and it improves fiscal responsibility but not only recovering more overpayments which currently total a staggering $12 billion per year, but also by making sure that this program is fully paid for. the last item something i want to focus on for a moment. all government spending in this agreement is fully paid for and not with one dime of higher taxes. all spending object un-- on unemployment and health care are fully paid for. this is a significant victory for those of us concerned about

the national debt. and the culture of deficit spending that has gripped washing for far too long. for example the unemployment program has added nearly $200 billion to our nation's debt over the last four years. no more. we paid for it in december, we are paying for it today, and we set a clear precedent that the congress must live within its means, no more spending unless it's paid for, period. i understand this is a compromise. and not everyone likes everything in here. if i had my way, the bill passed by the house in december would be the law. that was the only bill that extended these programs through the end of the year. it was the only bill that was fully paid for. and it was the only bill that ensured seniors and their doctors were protect interested dramatic cuts for at least two years. but we don't control washington. democrats still control washington. they control the senate and they control the white house. utilizing a process that dates back to our founding fathers, house republicans have scored significant victories in this

conference committee. our founding fathers recognize that washington would not always be united. in their wisdom they knew even divided government must still govern. and that's what we are doing here today. governing and providing a solution to the very real problems americans are facing in their daily lives. i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in supporting this legislation which pays for new spending with spending cuts, prevents working americans from getting hit with a tax increase next month, reforms our unemployment programs, and ensures seniors continue to have access to their doctors. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i yield such time as i shall consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for such time he may consume. mr. levin: the basic fact is that this legislation is very different from the december house republican bill, very different. and any efforts to mask that are false. and that house bill was the main

bill before the conference committee. the basic fact is the conference committee made major changes to the house bill that passed in december essentially on a partisan basis. and therefore this legislation is much better for the american people. the speaker said this about this bill, let's be honest, this is an economic relief package not a bill that's going to grow the economy and create jobs. that's not an honest statement. it's wrong. this is a bill that relates to the economic growth of the united states of america. we are recovering. and this bill will provide a boost to continue that recovery.

it continues the 2% payroll tax through the calendar year. and it is not offset as was true of the house republican bill in december. it had massive harmful cuts that would have been counter cyclical and would have undermined further economic growth. so in that respect this is very very different. it's also very different in terms of unemployment insurance. let's be clear about that. the bill that the republicans passed through the house that was the main bill before the conference committee would have slashed 40 weeks of unemployment insurance for millions of americans in every state regardless of the unemployment rate in that state.

and this bill essentially changes what was in the house bill. it extends unemployment insurance through the rest of the year up to, this is the maximum, up to 89 of 99 weeks through may, up to 79 weeks through august and up to 73 weeks through december, depending on the level of unemployment. let me just say our chairman has talked about job search and now a requirement of people be looking for work. that's already in the law of every state. that isn't a meaningful reform. in terms of job search, everybody not only registers but also, as i said, is requiring to look for work. and you know, i find it an

insult to the unemployed of this country to say essentially what we're simply giving them a check instead of a paycheck. you know if you talk to the unemployed through no fault of their own, they are looking for work. they had a paycheck, in most cases, year after year after year. they work for their unemployment insurance, and to simply label this an effort to get people off of unemployment insurance, unemployment insurance is not a welfare program. people work for it and they need that assistance as they look for work. the bill that passed through the house had a g.e.d. requirement. that's out. to say to people, you don't get a check if you're not in a

g.e.d. program when there are 160000 people in this country who are on waiting lists for education, that's out of here because it deserved to be out of here. and in terms of the drug programs, the effort to test people for drugs it is so limited so it is really masking the reality to call this major reform. it freezes in terms of the reimbursement for physicians through december. and let me just close by saying a few words about the limits on this bill because there are limits. it would have been much better to treat unemployment insurance as an emergency as we have for 20 years. this is the highest level of

long-term unemployed on record in this country, which is another reason not to blame the unemployed for their unemployment as the house bill in december did and some of the rhetoric on this floor continues to do. we were not able to obtain this and i want to say this in terms of a precedent. in my judgment, it should not serve as a precedent. the precedent is 20 years treating it as an emergency, and let me also say it's deeply unfortunate that some on the other side insisted that federal workers carry a disproportionate share in the cost of this bill. even if there were put forward bipartisan pay-fors that would have cost -- covered the cost of u.i. in a bill that was brought in a bipartisan basis, there would

have been an impact on federal employees of $67 billion. this bill has a provision that will apply to pension programs $15 billion over 10 years, compared to the $67 billion that was in the bill that the house republicans passed. so let me just say in closing, this argument provides tax relief to working families, a framework is in place for the year for the unemployed workers, and a real commitment -- and i emphasize this -- but -- by us democrats to pursue efforts to strengthen the economy and boost job growth so that those hardest hit by the recession can return to work as they desperately want to. and i just want to reiterate

how wrong the speaker was when he said, let's be honest, this is an economic relief package, not a bill that's going to grow the economy and create jobs. the opposite is true. the provisions in this bill will help to continue economic growth. the payroll tax, most economists say that. unemployment insurance, people spend it, and that is not only good for their subcystens but good for the economy of our country. for all those reasons i urge support of this conference committee, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from maryland. mr. hoyer: madam speaker, i yield myself five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. hoyer: thank you madam

speaker. i've taken the unusual process of claiming time in opposition to this bill. i have done so so i could place in context the bill we are considering. i do not rise to necessarily defeat this bill. i'm going to vote against this bill. i am for almost all of this bill. what we are funding this bill with was unnecessary unfair and ought to be rejected. i want to say at the outset that my friend mr. camp, and i had a very positive discussion. i believe that mr. camp and i could have reached an agreement which would have put me in support of this legislation. we didn't get there. we tried late in the game and we didn't get there. i regret that. i think mr. camp tried. i know that everybody on my side would have supported the agreement that mr. van hollen and i put forward. that agreement would, as the

current agreement would say that the only individuals paying for this bill out of 315 million americans are the two million civilian workers who work for us, who work for all of us, who day after day, week after week, month after month make sure we give the services to the people of the united states, protect the united states, ensure that our food is safe, ensure that we have amphibious agents on the job, -- make sure we have f.b.i. agents on the job, these are all civilian employees. highly skilled. highly trained. highly educated and, yes highly motivated. and every day they give outstanding service to the people of the united states. we talk here and we pass laws

here but none of those -- none of that talk and none of those laws makes a difference unless somebody implements what we say and the policies that we set. this congress is on the path to be the most anti-federal worker congress that i have served in. and i'm going to place that in context for you which is why i wanted the time. first of all, what is the context we find ourselves in? first of all we have a very struggling economy. the good news is the economy is coming back but not fast enough. we need to create more jobs, expand opportunities and make sure that the american dream is alive for all working americans. working americans like our federal employees, working americans like the folks at g.m. who have done just very well, working americans who work in the hardware store, the

grocery store, the gasoline station, hardworking americans. and we don't have enough jobs for them. as a result we have high unemployment, and i congratulate my friend mr. levin, for his leadership in making sure that the unemployment provision in this bill is sufficient to try to reach those folks and make sure they don't fall off the ledge. we walked away from them in december. i'm glad we are not walking away from them today. now, we also have, as all of us know, a struggling economy and therefore we put into effect giving $1,000 more to each and every worker. now, many of your leaders did not support this 2% reduction, and i understand that. i won't go into their names. some are in the chamber, but the fact of the matter is it

puts $1,000 of additional pockets into average working americans' pockets. people paying fica. that is people making less than $6,000. that is an important thing to do for us to keep this economy growing. i'm for that. i was for it in december. i'm for it in february. i'm glad we are going to have consensus on that today. but what i am not for -- let me go on because in addition to that, we are playing a silly little game. with the doctors and with medicare patients, and this silly little games pretends we are going to extend s.g.r. for 10 months. that's balo nmbs ey and everybody knows it -- baloney and everybody knows it. we are going to extend s.g.r. over and over and over again. we should have done it permanently in this bill.

we should have done it permanently in the congress which i was the majority leader. we should have done that. i yield myself two additional minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. hoyer: so with respect to s.g.r. ladies and gentlemen, we are playing a game and the doctors all over this country and the medicare recipients all over this country know we're playing a game. we're giving them no certainty, no confidence that come this september, october november, we won't have another one of these silly little debates. now, we also in the context have a deep deficit and debt that confronts this nation that we have to deal with, and we had two commissions that said we had to deal with it. one was bowles-simpson. my friend, mr. becerra sat on that my friend who sits in the chamber. the other was domenici and rivlin and we had others, including the gang of six in the united states senate, and all of them had a premise that we needed to deal with the

fiscal problem that confronts us and the other premise was all of us need to contribute to that solution. all of us. now, what do we see that's being proposed in this congress , partially in this bill but only partially in this bill? we have either on the floor proposed on passed over the last two years -- listen to this ladies and gentlemen -- we are about to cut or propose to cut $134 billion out of our federal employees over the next 10 years. nobody else in this bill, not a millionaire, not a billionaire, not a carried interest beneficiary, not an oil company, nobody in this bill other than federal employees is asked to pay. i understand we have hospital cuts. by the way, we have $5 billion

to that because we just increased by one year the cut that they know they got. the same for some other things. no individual other than a federal employee's asked to take a cut in this bill. now, you will say to me, no, it's future federal employees. two more minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. hoyer: you say it's future federal employees so it doesn't matter. that's $15 billion of the $134 billion that's been proposed. they've already paid $60 billion $60 billion, and by the way, your side of the aisle is not going to give them that half percent the president asked for so that will be an additional $30 billion. so in three years, mr. and mrs. america, madam speaker $90 billion in contribution to help bring this deficit down, federal employees are paying. and by the way, federal employees is a percentage of

our population are down by a third over the last 20 years. it's not that the bureaucracy is growing. yes, our population is growing. we're trying to serve them. down by a third in numbers. now, i know something about federal employee pay. i represent about 60,000 federal employees. you say hoyer is up there defending his people. you'd be right. you'd be very right. . but most of the federal employees don't live in the washington metropolitan area. they live in your districts all over this country, serving your farmers. serving your drug stores. serving everything that you do. do i think it's the private sector that makes this country great? absolutely. do i believe they need an energized high morale, highly

educated federal work force as their partner? i do. and you will not have that ladies and gentlemen, if we keep along this path of every time we come to a bill that's a little bit of trouble the pay for is to reach in the federal employees' pockets. they pretty much are going to say i'm not with you any longer. i want to tell you in terms of recruiting and retaining you will not do it. 40% of the federal work force, ladies and gentlemen, can retire in the next five years. one more minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for an additional minute. mr. hoyer: ladies and gentlemen, you are going to be able to recruit those folks only if you have a competitive work force. let me give you a figure that you might find interesting. there are 33,000 -- 33,300 employees at goldman sachs.

average salary, ladies and gentlemen, $367,057. average calorie. -- salary. of 33,300 people. you won't be able to compete. you won't be able to get n.s.a. employees as opposed to semans or microsoft or some of those other corporation, many of which are in ms. eshoo's district, you won't be able to recruit them and retain them to have the best and brightest defending america and making america the strongest and greatest country on earth. you want america to be an exceptional country, you better best have the best civil service on earth? . as well as the best private sector. one more minute. ladies and gentlemen, i don't know whether most of you know this i saw the gentleman from florida who has been here for a couple months pontificate i didn't know anything outside the

beltway. i was the sponsor of the federal employee pay comparability act. and george bush the first signed that october. we worked with his o.m.b. to get it. what does it say? federal employees cannot get a raise unless the private sector gets a raise. we are precluded from getting a raise unless the private sector gets a raise. what does it further say? that the private sector which is the economic cost index, by the way, in case you want to know exactly what the statistic is says we are going to take a half a point less. so what have you done? in this bill. unnecessarily. because you are going to freeze their salary for the third year in a row. and simpson-bowles said do it for three. but they said everybody ought to share. we only get $1 trillion in revenues. $1 trillion in cuts. everybody. one more minute, but nobody but

federal employees. nobody. is targeted in this bill other than federal employees. you can tell i'm angry about that because that's not fair. and that's not how you want to treat our employees, america's employees. america's public servants we call them. we ought to stop dissing them. we ought to stop demagoguing them. we ought to stop using bureaucrat as an epithet. america needs them. i'll have some other things to say in a few minutes, madam speaker. but we ought not to walk away from our federal employees any more than we ought to walk away from those 160 million people who need this tax cut or walk away from those 2.4 million who need that unemployment

insurance. or walk away as we have from the doctors who need certainty, long-term, not for 10 months, but long term. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: thank you. before i yield i just would like to say to the gentleman that he did characterize our conversations correctly. it was very late. i do look forward to working with him in the future on these issues as we move forward. with that i would yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from oregon, a conferee mr. walden. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for two minutes. mr. walden: thank you, madam speaker. thank you, mr. camp. i want to thank my colleague from michigan for his extraordinary leadership in pulling the house and senate together as chairman of our conference. one of the key elements of this piece of legislation is freeing up enormous swath of spectrum for use in the -- to grow jobs in technology and innovation, generate $15 billion to the

treasury to help pay for some of the things that are being discussed today to extend the middle class tax cut, to provide unemployment for those who are seeking work, and in the process here there are estimates of building up the 4-g network which will take spectrum like that that will be made available here could generate between 300,000 and 700,000 american jobs and unleash technology and innovation in america. in addition to doing that, the republican house in concert with our colleagues across the aisle and chambers have come together to finally take care of you are public safety officials who on that terrible day in september of 2011 discovered their devices did not communicate well with each other, if at all. so finally we have come together to create an interoperable public safety broadband network they can operate on wherever they are wherever disaster may strike, and they'll be able to communicate with each other.

we have allocated money to build it out. i think we have put governance structure in place that while it's not exactly what i hoped would happen i think it can function. we will see. so we have built out a public safety network for our public safety officials. that will get under way. this bill will help generate 300,000 top00,000 american jobs, generate $15 billion private sector money coming into the government to help pay for some of this and protect our over-the-air broadcasters. our tv broadcasters who will be asking in a voluntary auction if they want to give up a spectrum are protected so the viewers out there and-k still see and watch their over-the-air public -- public and private broadcasters. madam speaker, this is good legislation. and i hope you'll support it. the speaker pro tempore: gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield to a member of the conference committee, mr. waxman, and the ranking member on energy and commerce, two minutes.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. waxman: madam speaker, with two minutes i'd like to ask unanimous consent that i be able to revise and extend my remarks and insert extraneous material. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. waxman: with those remarks. i'll vote for this bill but i do so with reservations. we should have done better in meeting our responsibilities to the american people. there are important provisions in this legislation that will do a lot of good for families and our economy. we are extending the payroll tax reduction for millions of families, extending unemployment insurance, ensuring the doctors serving seniors will be paying for their services through the end of the year. and we are making spectrum available for new innovations in wireless communications. while these are provisions i support, in the conference report there are significant missed opportunities and poor choices that affect federal workers and preventive health programs. nowhere is this lost opportunity

more apparent than our failure to end the medicare physician payment formula known as the s.g.r., and set us on a path to a fair and reasonable physician reimbursement system. having to settle for another temporary solution which leases at the end of the year even deeper in the hole in terms of a permanent solution it's a real failure and one that fails medicare beneficiaries and doctors alike, and i did not agree with the cuts in reimbursement for hospitals and nursing homes and unbelievably in prevention services in order to pay for the physician reimbursement levels at a reasonable amount. i am he deeply -- i'm deeply concerned about the federal employees' provision i think that is very unfair. i do not have similar reservations about the spectrum provisions in the conference report. our bipartisan, bicameral negotiations resulted in legislation that will make new spectrum available for broadband

services, will create a nationwide band ever spectrum that can be used for innovative, unlicensed applications, and will provide for the construction of an interoperable broadband network for first responders. taken as a hole, i -- whole, i believe we should support this package even with its serious shortcomings. yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. who seeks recognition? the gentleman from maryland. mr. hoyer: madam speaker, i now yield to mr. van hollen, the ranking member of the budget committee, distinguished gentleman from maryland. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. van hollen: thank you, madam speaker. i thank my colleague, mr. hoyer. this bill accomplishes three

very important objectives. it extends the payroll tax cut for 160 million americans. it extends unemployment insurance to millions of americans who are out of work through no fault of their own, and it supports the medicare program. so i am not here on the floor today to urge my colleagues to vote against this bill. in fact i'm confident that it will pass. the bill's also significant for what it will not do. unlike the original republican house bill, which cut compensation for current federal employees by about $40 billion this bill does not cut compensation for any current federal employee. not one cent. let me repeat that. i'm pleased that senator cardin and i and other members of the conference committee were successful in holding harmless our hardworking current federal employees. that being said, i'm going to vote no to send a message that enough is enough when it comes

to using the federal work force as a piggy bank to fund our various national initiatives. here's why. while no current employees are impacted by this bill, it does cut compensation for future employees hired starting in january, 2013. and that will, as mr. hoyer said, it will make it much more difficult for us to attract the federal employees we need to do our national work together as part of our federal service. and indeed, one half, a full half of the 10-month extension for unemployment insurance that benefits the entire country $15 billion, is financed by cutting compensation for future federal employees. that is a disproportionate share from the federal work force. the federal work force has already contributed over $88 billion to our deficit reduction for the denial of two colas and

the proposed cola cut this year and the republican transportation bill would cut another $42 billion from federal employees to finance our national highways. that's a ridiculous approach. federal employees, as mr. hoyer said, are willing to do their fair share to help reduce our deficit, but stop singling them out and making -- singling them out and making them scapegoats. they had nothing to do with the meltdown on wall street and i'm sick and tired of hearing some members of congress badmouthing and belittling federal employees. if i could have an additional 30 seconds, please. mr. hoyer: 30 seconds. mr. van hollen: they are an easy political target for some, as mr. hoyer said. but it is irresponsible to denigrate their good work. these are the men and women who care for our veterans and many of our wounded soldiers. these are the people in our intelligence community who helped track down osama bin laden. these are the folks at n.i.h. and elsewhere who help find

treatments and cures that help prevent diseases that plague every american family. they are the folks who protect our borders. they are the folks that help run the medicare and social security system. they are the folks in the capitol hill police that protect this great center of democracy right here. so while this conference report does many good things, we need to send a message it's time to stop scapegoating federal employees and using them as the piggy bank for our national objectives. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to a member of the conference committee, the gentlewoman from north carolina. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized for two ou madam speaker. i ask unanimous consent to address the house for two minutes and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mrs. ellmers: yesterday afternoon i happyly signed the conference report that was -- happily signed the conference report that was very, very well put together, and i commend chairman camp for the hard work that he did and my fellow

conferees. this joint conference committee came together. it was tasked to negotiate the payroll tax holiday extension, and this is a very important break through and shows that we can actually work together and compromise for the sake of the american people. i would like to thank again chairman camp and my fellow conferees once again for the honor and privilege to serve on this committee. our report does what is necessary to provide a responsible level of certainty to job creators and ensure that millions of hardworking americans will be protected. . in this obama economy, it's important that american taxpayers keep more of their money and use it to make ends meet. gas prices are projected to go up above $4 a gallon, madam speaker, by the summer. if this puts a little more money in individuals' pockets

so they can pay for half a tank of gas or a quarter of a tank of gas then i say i'm all for it. furthermore, this deal strikes the most dramatic blow to obamacare yet, keeping a promise i made when i first came to washington. with this agreement we are cutting spending by more than $50 billion and using a portion of these savings to pay for the doc fix. what is the doc fix? the doc fix ensures millions of medicare patients our seniors to receive that medical care. it will prevent the 24.7% cut for physicians for medicare services. we must now return to the focus of the most pressing issue facing our nation which is job creation and fixing this economy. the speaker pro tempore: jeaths. mrs. ellmers: may i have another 30 seconds.

mr. camp: i yield another 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for another 30 seconds. mrs. ellmers: the obama submitted another bloated budget that ignores the economic crisis we are living under the obama economy. it's time to roll up or sleeves and get to work and remove these barriers to prosperity and focus on the one thing that matters most, job creation, and continue to provide certainty to millions of americans who are looking to us to make concise decisions about their future and the future of their children. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. just as a reminder the time remaining is the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp has 11 3/4 minutes. mr. levin from michigan has 10 minutes remaining. and mr. hoyer of maryland has five. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: it's now my pleasure to yield one minute to our distinguished leader, ms.

pelosi from the great state of california. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: i thank the gentleman for yielding and for hised a vow cass on -- advocacy on behalf of the thriving middle class of america and make sure we would have this payroll tax cut as well as the extension of unemployment insurance. he fought so hard on that as well as on the making sure that our seniors are able to see their doctors under medicare. congratulations and thank you, mr. levin. i rise today madam speaker, in support of this legislation. of course, i identify with the concerns expressed by our distinguished whip, mr. hoyer, and mr. van hollen, regarding our public employees. before i talk directly about what is in the bill i do want to say that for our country to thrive and for us to do our very best, we must have a great relationship between the public

and the private sector. the private sector is the driving engine of job creation in our country, but it cannot succeed unless we also have an effective and thriving public sector. it's about so many things that we lates to our public safety, -- relates to our public safety the courts, the implementation of laws passed in congress, it doesn't exist unless the public sector then implements. so this is a relationship that's existed from the beginning of time in our country and it's not a zero-some game. we can't say we are going to do this in the private sector at the expense of the public sector so i salute them for their persistent leadership and recognizing the important role that the public sector pays. it was not necessary for us to go down the path that has been taken in this bill, and i'll get to that in a moment. i just want to say this

represents a victory for the middle class in our country. i appreciate president obama taking this message to the american people, that it was very important for us to have a payroll tax cut for the middle class. it's important to those families because it puts $40 more into a paycheck to buy groceries, to buy gasoline, to make ends meet, to make ends meet, but it was additional being personal to families, it had a macroeconomic effect because these families will spend that money, inject demand in the economy and that is a job creator. any economist will tell you that this is very important to continuing the economic recovery in our country, to have rejected it, as had been in the mix earlier, would have halted if not turned back our economic recovery.

so let us recognize that one of -- we have three pillars that we insisted be in this package. we on the democratic side. one, that we would have a payroll tax cut for 160 million americans. what is unfortunate is we did not use our choice of a pay-for, should it be paid for, the surcharge to covered the unemployment insurance. that would have been a preferable place to go. the undiplomat extension -- the extension of unemployment insurance. it could have also been used to pay for the s.g.r., the ability for seniors to see their doctors instead of taking money out of the prevention piece of the affordable care act. prevention is -- makes america healthier, it saves money, it expands opportunity for people to get in the health care loop. that's unfortunate. and it could have been avoided

as well as the unfortunate provision relating to our public employees. and even on that score mr. hoyer said mr. van hollen did there was a further compromise that could have been made that addressed some of the needs of the republicans to vote for this bill without doing more harm to the -- as mr. hoyer said, the recruitment, the retention of public employees the best public employees to help implement our laws and i want to salute all of them for their patriotic duty to our country, to keep us safe in every possible way, to allow commerce to proceed in a very positive way. but now let's get back to why this is important, this victory for the middle class. this was a fight. why should it have been a

fight? there's something out there in the public the ground troops the common sense coming up from the ground that this was an important thing to do, and the american people overwhelmingly supported it. there's a ground truth out there from the public, common sense coming up from the ground that in order for us to do -- meet our needs and also reduce the deficit that we should have a surcharge on the wealthiest people in our country. people making over $1 million a year. not having $1 million. making over $1 million a year. that was not contained in this bill, but it will be part of the debate as we go forward. so let's take a moment to say that we recognize here on this floor of the house the importance of a thriving middle class to our democracy, to our democracy, and that this action

taken today is an important step but we have much more work to do. democrats are committed to reigniting the american dream, to building ladders of opportunity for all who want to work hard, play by the rules, take responsibility, but we have work to do. in this thriving -- this -- reigniting the american dream, it's about recognizing the role of entrepreneurialism in our system small businesses, what they do to grow our economy and how we have a public-private relationship there to encourage small business and, again, all of this relates to a thriving middle class. so i urge my colleagues to be ever vigilant about every opportunity we can take to support the middle class. today is a good day in that regard. it's just one piece of it, though. we have much more work to do.

and every bill that comes up, there are things you may not like in it and you say well, i'm not going to vote for it for that reason. on balance i come down in favor of supporting what the president asked us to do which we did do what the american people want us to do but i don't want to go forward without registering the concern that we could have done better in this. and one place we can start on our next legislation is to look at the surcharge for the wealthiest people in america instead of taking billions of dollars from preventive care so that we can offset the costs in here. none of it needed to be offset. unemployment insurance has not traditionally been paid for. we didn't have to do it now. in fact, paying for it diminishes some of its stimulative effects. as economists will tell you,

unemployment benefits are paid out, spent back in the treasury as will the payroll tax cut, it will stimulate the economy by injecting demand and creating more jobs. s.g.r. we should have gone all the way with it. we should have done it permanently. we could have paid for it with our war savings or with the surcharge at the high end. the republicans said no. having said all of that, having said all of that, the fact that we are here today is an admission and -- that this is the right thing to do in terms of the payroll tax cut and unemployment compensation and our seniors a recognition that the american people are watching and they have little appetite for us to be fighting over what they know is the right thing to do which is to take every action we can to grow our economy, focusing on the middle class, small

business sburel spirit -- entrepreneurial spirit and the rest reignite the american dream in an even bigger way. with that, madam speaker, i urge our colleagues to support the legislation, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. hoyer: madam speaker, i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. connolly: i thank my colleague. i support the doc fix in this bill. i support the payroll tax cut extension in this bill. i support the extension of unemployment insurance to so many of our fellow americans who suffered in the great recession. sadly, i cannot, however, bring myself to vote for this bill. i represent the third largest number of federal employees in the united states, and they're asking a simple question -- what is the nexus, what is the relationship between their employment and these worthy

subjects? and the answer is none. three times this week the republican majority has attempted to get axed benefits and pay and compensation of the federal work force and often it's from misinformation. a bloated work force. we entered data in a hearing record the other day that shows the obama administration in absolute terms has 350,000 fewer federal workers than those that served during the administration of president h.w. bush and as a ratio to 1,000 population in america, it's the lowest since john kennedy was in the white house, in 50 years. they have already given $90 billion to debt reduction through pay freezes and future pay freezes. and to whack at this pensions affecting both current and future employees in the pending

transportation legislation that i hope will die of its own weight. it is not fair to ask only one group of americans to make a sacrifice shared sacrifice should mean shared sacrifice. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i yield two minutes -- i yield two minutes to a member of the house conference committee, the gentlewoman from new york. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from new york is recognized for two minutes. >> this conference report that we bring to our colleagues for a vote today represents a remarkable good faith fert by the members of a committee who combined, who worked together, democrats and republicans, house and senate, to act responsibly for the american people and in response to what the american people have asked us to do. ms. hayworth: as a physician and i practiced in the hudson valley in new york, the

importance of extending reimbursement insurance for our seniors who rely on medicare, for the doctors who care for them, who have to keep their doors open, is a crucial issue. but not only did we provide that assurance through the end of this year, we also provided for some other crucial provisions for our rural hospitals, for our ambulance services for a number of other aspects of care that rely on our action and on the responsible action that we take today. and, yes, we did pay for those extensions in a responsible way , as we must, in a time of looming fiscal crisis. . we have a debt that extends to $50,000, roughly, per man, woman, and child in this country. it is unconscionable for us to fail to acknowledge that

responsibility and for all of us to do our part in that way. we have, yes, asked our federal employees to help us because as the employer, the federal government has to take its responsible steps as well. and the hope that all of us have is that we will continue to work through this year. we will move from here with this consensus document and continue to work on the growth that our economy desperately needs and do so together, by controlling what the federal government does. and i thank you, madam speaker. i yield back. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to another conferee the gentleman from california, mr. becerra. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. becerra: i thank the gentleman for yielding. in december this congress gave 20 conferees three tasks a cheeve by february 29.

to extend the payroll tax cut for 160 million middle class americans. to ensure americans who lost their jobs through no fault of their own received their unemployment insurance benefits. and to guarantee our seniors on medicare have access to the doctors of their choice and the care they need. we achieved this goal. but let's be clear. this agreement is by no means free of controversy. the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer, eloquently illustrated that. our republican colleagues succeeded in extrabblingting a pound of flesh from -- extracting a pound of flesh from middle class working americans who also serve ably in the federal government. what was the alternate that we faced -- alternative that we faced? a house republican bill passed in december that quadrupled the cuts to workers in their salaries and benefits, that increased the cost of medicare for millions of seniors, that eliminated and restricted access to physical, speech, and occupational therapy in hospital settings for medicare patients, that eliminated the child tax credit for millions of modest

income families. that eliminated unemployment insurance benefits for nearly three million americans who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own. this agreement represents a rejection of the approach in the house republican bill of december. it is a compromise, free of the controversial and extraneous measures in that republican bill in december. but it is a bill of controversy. because we are asking american workers who work very hard who give their all and just happen to work for the federal government to pay the cost of helping other americans who are unemployed. we could have made this a good bill. we could have asked every american, especially those most able to contribute, to help out. we didn't in this bill and that's why it's a compromise. it could have been much better. but we face the deadline by february 29 for 160 million american families. would have seen their taxes increase.

we would have seen a situation where millions of americans would have lost their unemployment insurance and we needed to act as we did. i urge my colleagues to vote for this compromise measure. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. hoyer: i yield a minute and a half to the distinguished ranking member of the government reform committee mr. elijah cummings from maryland. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. cummings: i'm very pleased we are extending the payroll tax cut through the end of the year which is essential to support our continued economic recovery. i'm also pleased we are providing unemployment benefits to ensure the millions of americans have access to benefits they so urgently need and that we are implementing the doc fix to ensure that seniors who are on medicare can continue to see the physicians of their choice. that said, there are a number of provisions in this agreement that deeply disappoint me. for example, this agreement will reduce by 30 weeks the maximum number of weeks of unemployment insurance available to residents of states with average

unemployment rates, while the unemployment picture is certainly improving in january with the creation of 243,000 jobs, and a reduction in the unemployment rate of 8.3%, there's still 12.8 million people unemployed in this nation and millions more who are part-time but want full-time work. for millions of fellow citizens unemployment benefits are truly a lifeline. i'm also deeply disappointed that the conference report requires new federal workers who contributed more to their pensions. our federal employees are not a piggy bank. we should not reach into their pockets any time we need to pay for something. federal workers are the backbone of our government. in return for their hard work and dedication, the majority has been re-- has rewarded federal workers with an unprecedented amount of criticism, assault on their compensation, and benefits including proposals to extend their current two-year

pay freeze and arbitrarily cut the number of federal employees. and now -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. cummings: i'm going to vote against this conference report. it's an important bill to get through, but i have to vote against it in the name of my employees. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i yield 2 1/2 minutes to the chairman of the energy and commerce committee and a member of the house senate-house conference the gentleman from michigan. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. mr. upton: i thank the gentleman from the great state of michigan for yielding. i rise obviously in support of this conference report. it's not perfect but it is srnl the right thing to do now. -- certainly the right thing to do now. our economy is still struggling bigtime. families are struggling in my home state of michigan, we know better than anyone else the pain of high unemployment and anemic economic growth. in extending the temporary payroll tax relief and unemployment benefits, it's not the way to fix the economy, but we need to do it now to offer a measure of relief to those in

need. but our long-term goal is certainly much bigger. we got to fix the economy. we got to create jobs. we need to return america to a place where these temporary patches are not needed. in addition to the payroll tax and unemployment health extensions, this package includes the doc fix threw the end of the year to protect seen -- through the end of the year to protect seniors to prevent physician reimbursement rates from being slashed by nearly 30%. again it is but a temporary solution to a long-term problem. and as chairman of the energy and commerce committee i'm absolutely committed to working with my good friend, chairman camp, to develop a permanent solution to the medicare physician payment system. one that protects seniors and their doctors in the long-term while also protecting taxpayers and making sure that medicare is efficient, effective and sustainable. these temporary solutions are a big part of the package, but

madam speaker, it would be a terrible mistake to ignore another part of the package. one that will help support literally hundreds of thousands of jobs, one that will spur billions of dollars of investment in our economy and affect the daily lives of nearly every american. i'm talking about spectrum reform. spectrum, it's the airwaves that carried wireless communications. spectrum is all around us and we sure do use it. with the explosion in smart phones tablets, mobile broadband devices, americans are using more spectrum than ever before. this bill helps our country make more efficient use of those airwaves. we are clearing large swaths of spectrum from innovative wireless investments and the upshot is that wireless companies will pay the taxpayers billions of dollars for the right to build the next generation of wireless networks. it's a huge win for consumers and taxpayers. this package is the culmination of years of effort, bipartisan effort, numerous hearings,

extensive stakeholder input, cooperations on both sides of the aisle, and i want to recognize my good friend and chairman of the communications and telecommunication -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized -- >> both greg walled ron and -- walden and anna eshoo to push this bill through the finish line. no qualified bidder can be excluded from the auction. were it not giving away airwaves that the taxpayers paid to clear. these are good solid reforms with clear congressional intent and i appreciate the hard work to get an agreement and advance this wireless future. i think all my colleagues on the conference committee. we worked together. we got it done, and the taxpayers are going to be better off. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to another hardworking member of the conference committee, ms. schwartz from the state of pennsylvania. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from pennsylvania is recognized for two minutes. ms. schwartz: thank you. this conference committee was

charged with resolving differences between the house and senate so we could extend middle class tax cuts, protect seniors, access to their doctors, and extend unemployment benefits for americans looking for work. as a member of the conference committee i'm pleased we found a compromise to meet these goals and we are able to provide stability for millions of americans. action today means 160 million american taxpayers will be able to keep more of their hard-earned dollars. these are middle class families struggling to pay their mortgages, food built, childcare cost and college tuition. this tax cut will better enable them to meet their obligations and contribute to growing the economy. it means that 13 million of our hardest working americans will receive unemployment benefits and be better able to provide for their families. there are encouraging measures of economic growth in our country, but recovery is still fragile. we had 23 consecutive months of private sector job growth, unemployment numbers are down. yet millions of americans are

still looking for work. action today better ensures that losing a job will not mean economic disaster for families who have worked hard and played by the rules. action today will mean we will keep our promise to 47 million seniors by preventing a drastic 27% cut to physicians who care for medicare beneficiaries. this is a win for american seniors. but it does not relieve us of our responsibility to permanently repeal the s.g.r. and replace it with a new payment system. for over a decade this failed policy has created uncertainty and instability for patients, for health care providers, and the federal budget. throughout this process i advocated for both permanent fiscally responsible repeal of the failed medicare policy, and a path forward to new payment models to improve quality while reducing costs. despite bipartisan support for this approach, long-term agreement could not be preached. i will continue to work with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to end this perennial

threat to the promise of medicare once and for all. i urge support for american families and seniors and millions of americans still searching for a job. i urge support for this conference report. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. hoyer: i yield one minute to the gentleman from virginia, mr. moran. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia is recognized for one minute. mr. moran: thank you madam speaker. i thank my good friend from maryland. i appreciate the work of the conferees. but i oppose this conference agreement not out of concern for the welfare of the tens of thousands of federal employees that i represent, but out of concern for the welfare of the great nation we serve. we are blessed with the least corrupt, most effective least discriminatory, most responsive federal work force in the world. and yet how do we repay them?

we are requiring them to increase their pension contributions by 400% with no increase in benefits. so we are sending them a signal. so i will really appreciate what you are doing. you are expendable. it's a signal that will not be lost on the recruits that we desperately need in the few -- future. let alone the hundreds of thousands of federal employees who could easily be making much more in the private sector. the whole country's going to pay a price for the signal that this bill sends. and that's why i think we should defeat it. thank you, mr. chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves his time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i now yield one minute to the distinguished representative from california, ms. eshoo. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. eshoo: i thank the gentleman. madam speaker, i rise today as

the ranking member of the communications and technology subcommittee. on this legislation because i think it's so important. it will define our nation's ability to lead the world in wireless broadband deployment. it also will define how we finally provide our first responders with a nationwide interoperable broadband network. this legislation will usher in more competition, enhance innovation bolster the american economy, and very, very importantly create jobs. good jobs. i thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle and the other chamber for coming together to develop legislation that promotes the public interest and ensures the return on investment for the taxpayer by supporting unlicensed spectrum, a nationwide interoperable public safety broadband network and

provisions to ensure that our nation's 9-1-1 call centers will have the modern tools needed to improve the quality and the speed of emergency response. incentive auctions will ensure we have the world's leading wireless infrastructure and the future for unlicensed innovation in the tv band is bright. the public safety community is going to have the tools -- 30 seconds. 15 seconds. mr. levin: 15 seconds. ms. eshoo: the public safety community will have the tools to finally build out a critical nationwide interoperable broadband network and the inclusion of provisions to promote and fund next generation 9-1-1 bye will enable the delivery of voice text, photos, videos and other data to 9-1-1 call centers. i thank my colleagues and i urge them to support the legislation. .

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland. mr. levin: i reserve -- mr. hoyer: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from michigan. mr. he vip: i yield one minute@distinguished gentlelady , ms. edwards. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. edwards: i would like to enter into the record letters from public employees who are wondering why they had to sacrifice $60 billion of reductions over the last decade when they didn't create the deficit, yet they're asked to pay for it. the speaker pro tempore: you want to enter into the record, without objection. ms. edwards: and i rise in opposition to the conference report. on behalf of federal workers, and i wonder where it is that we'll be able to find the next robert ball who lived in my district, who was the architect of social security.

i wonder where -- whether we'll be able to find the national security and intelligence specialist who live in my district in collington for the next generation. i wonder mr. speaker, whether we'll find the next negotiator of a stark treaty in my district. we won't find them because we asked federal workers to sacrifice for a deficit they didn't create. with that, i yield back the plans of my time and say let's vote against this legislation, vote against the conference report, support federal workers and the talented work force we have for future generations. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back her time. the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the distinguished gentleman from oregon. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. walden: once again as we're reading about how troubled the economy is this is the weakest

recovery since the great depression. it is certainly the kind of economy we all want to improve. the underlying piece of this legislation frees up spectrum that will generate hundreds of thousands of jobs as 4g is built out. they need spectrum to build out 4g. this provides spectrum. this is a voluntary incentive auction. nobody is being force off the air waives -- airwaves, but they'll have the opportunity to go off the airwaves and make the sprecktrum available. people say, what is that? that's what powers the device, your ipad, an detroit whatever and it will generate $15 billion from the private sector into the government by auctioning off this spectrum to help pay for the middle class tax cut and pay for

unemployment extension. and the doc fix. we would have, on our side of the aisle preferred a two-year fix for our physicians taking care of seniors on medicare. but that was not to be. and we know that. but we could not let them fall off the cliff and see their reimbursement rates cut 27.4%. contained in here are solutions for the long term and short-term that we're going to have to revisit. the other thing we did that's important is we're going to build out an interoperable public safety broadband network for our first responders our brave men and women, public servants, police and fire will finally have this congress answer the call that's been pending since 9/11. post-9/11 they said you got to get our public safety people an interoperable broadband network and it didn't get done until now. when you vote for this legislation, you're voting to help your public servants and

police and fire to finally have the tools to keep them safe and do their jobs. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: how much time is left for each? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has three minutes remaining the gentleman from maryland has one minute remaining and the gentleman from michigan in support has four minutes remaining. mr. levin: i yield one minute to the representative and leader in our caucus, mr. clyburn. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for one minute. mr. clyburn: thank you very much mr. speaker, i thank my friend for yielding me the timism support this compromise because it ensures that we will be able to continue tax cuts for millions of american workers and it preserves viable benefits for unemployed americans that are essential for the overall economy and

safeguards seniors' access to their doctors. while i will vote yes, this agreement is not perfect. i have serious objections to the continuing demonization of public servants in the federal government. we should not keep cutting their pay and benefits while refusing to ask the top 1% to pay one penny more. federal employees have sacrificed now and they should be given time to share in the sacrifices all of us should. i'm also disappointed that this bill cuts money for prevention, which is so important to the health of all americans. mr. speaker, i believe that an ounce of prevention is worth a poun of cure. thank you and i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: who seeks recognition? the gentleman from maryland. mr. hoyer: i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. camp: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan reserves. the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: i reserve. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan -- mr. camp: we're prepared to begin closing if you're ready. mr. hoyer: i think i have a go first. mr. camp: i yield the gentleman one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. hoyer: i thank my friend the speaker, i'm glad he's in the chair. we have worked together because we understand what needs to be done to meet the crisis that confronts our country. all of us need to participate, not just our federal employees, but all of us. in the short-term, we need to do -- in the short-term, we

need to do what this bill does. 160 million people will get an extra $1,000 that hopefully will help build our economy, create jobs, expand opportunity for our people. the unemployed will make sure that they have that safety net critical for them and their families. the doctors will have a short period of time to have some confidence that they will be compensated to serve medicare patients over the next 10 months. the only people asked to pay for that, as i said before are federal employees. that's why i took this 20 minutes, to say to each and every one of us in this house first of all, federal employees ought not to be the piggy bank out of which you pretend we'll be able to pay the deficit. that's wrong. it's not been recommended by any of our groups. i've had the opportunity of working with mr. camp, who in my view is a very conscientious

member of this body. i'm glad he's the leader. actually i wish mr. levin was the leader because he's of my party. but my party -- but since my party is not in control, i'm glad mr. camp leads us, he's a reasonable person. ladies and gentlemen of this house, america must know that we all need to contribute. the federal employee has paid $60 billion over the last 24 months, over the next 10 years already, $60 billion. and this year will have their pay reduced from what the law requires another $30 billion. that's $90 billion. forget about this bill, forget about the highway bill, which says $44 billion in additional reduction and benefits $134 billion is on the table. it hasn't passed, but it's on the table. let us as conscientious members of this congress, as representatives of the people,

come together and have a plan that does not require nickel -dim diming federal employees nickel-diming doctors nickel-diming medicare patients and nickel-diming america. let us come together and do what needs to be done. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan. mr. levin: how much time is left for mr. camp and myself. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan has two minutes remaining, the gentleman from michigan on the proponents' side has three and three quarter minutes remaining. mr. levin: thank you. i yield myself the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: i think this has been a healthy discussion and i think all of us respect very much the positions that have been put forth. i think we need to look at where we came from. the main bill before the

conference committee was the bill that passed on a partisan basis here in december. it essentially would have countermanded the effort and continued mick growth through the payroll tax bill, it would have required very inimical pay-fors. it would have threatened the pay of 160 million people. that bill also would have cut drastically unemployment insurance, cutting unemployment insurance is not reform. it is not reform. people have worked for, these are people looking for work who can't find it. we have worked so hard so hard to defend and to preserve the

lifeline of unemployment insurance as best we could and essentially it does preserve in major ways through the rest of this year and for seniors, we have made sure that health care , their physician, is available. with respect to differing points of view, i strongly urge support for this conference committee report. it said it isn't perfect and it's often said no bill is perfect, but we have worked to preserve the basic ingredients to preserve economic growth and preserve the unemployment insurance so critical for the unemployed of this country. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield myself such

time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. camp: this conference report extends the payroll tax cut to 160 million working americans, it prevents a cut in physician payments through the end of the year so that seniors can get the medical treatment an care that they need under medicare. this represents about $800 for working families in america over the next 10 months, but most importantly this agreement includes no job-killing tax hikes to pay for more government spending. the deficit spending on unemployment stops with this legislation, this agreement firmly establishes that extensions of unemployment benefits must be paid for. this includes this legislation -- this legislation also includes some of the most significant reforms to unemployment since the 1930's, job search requirements, drug screening and testing, reemployment programs, these are all critical for work readiness and for reemployment and these are essential reforms

to the unemployment system. we also re-authorize temp assistance for needy families with this legislation but while doing so, make reforms to that program as well by closing the loophole that allowed welfare funds to be accessed at a.t.m.'s and in strip clubs liquor stores, and casinos. this bill, the government spening in this bill is fully offset. reductions to obamacare pay for more than half of the health spending in this legislation. and this also restores to the congress a process dating back to our founding fathers. they knew that at times government would be divided and that we couldn't always agree. this agreement was debated in public using that time-honored process and with that, i urge all members to support this bipartisan house-senate conference agreement. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. all time for debate has expired. pursuant to house resolution 554 the previous question is

ordered. the question is on adoption of the conference report. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the conference report is adopted. without objection -- for what purpose? mr. camp: i demand the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays shall rise. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on adopting the conference report will be followed by a five-minute vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal, if ordered. s that 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote, the yeas are 293, the nays are 132 the conference report is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pursuant to clause of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal which the chair will put de novo. the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> mr. speaker i ask unanimous consent to remove my name as

co-sponsor of h.r. 1380. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the house will be in order. would members respectfully take their conversations from the floor? clear the well.

let the house be in orer. would members take their conversations from the floor. clear the well, clear the aisle. the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir pursuant to house 11 clause 3b-5 and with the unanimous approval of the committee on ethics committee, i am writing to request the appointment of six substitute members necessitated by a voluntary recusal to serve for any proceedings related to the matter of representative maxine

waters, the matter currently before this committee. timing of recusal, prior to the end of the 111th congress, a bipartisan leadership of the committee each recognized the need to hire outside counsel to complete this matter obviously july 20, 2011, the committee announced it voted unanimously to hire attorney billy martin as outside counsel to review, advise and assist the committee in completing this matter. a key phrase of mr. martin's assistance is to review allegations that this committee violated due process rights for rules atatching to representative waupters. in addition, mr. martin was asked to address whether recusal of any members of the committee should be considered and when would be the most appropriate time for his recommendations regard regular cusal. mr. martin has informed the committee he has reviewed tens of thousands of pages of

documents and has interviewed current and former committee members as well as current and former committee staff. each current and former committee member and current employee who was requested for interview fully cooperated with mr. martin. however, mr. martin has advised that one necessary witness has reviewed -- refused to appear voluntarily and when subpoenaed to testify communicated to the committee that the witness would refuse to answer questions on the basis of the witnesses -- witness' fifth amendment privilege. the witness' refusal to answer questions prevents completion of the due process review. while mr. martin advised us the most appropriate time to present his recommendations would be on completion of his due process review he has now counseled the committee to advance that timing and consider the recusal recommendations prior to considering the witnesses refusal to testify. as the committee must now determine its next steps in

this matter, mr. martin has recommended that the leadership of the current committee and four members who served on the committee in the 111th congress consider recusal from further pr seedings in this matter. after careful consideration the six committee members have requested their voluntary recusal. reasons for recusal. mr. speaker, the record should note that these recusal requests are not based on any indication of wrongdoing or inappropriate partisanship by the members. in fact, mr. martin has advised the committee that to date one, he has not scored any evidence to indicate actual bias or partiality by any member of staff or committee member. he has not found a reason for the recuse ol of any staff member or employee of the committee, and three there is no conflict that would require

the recusal of any current staff member or member of the committee. instead these recusal requests come from members of the committee who voluntarily cooperated with mr. martin's review, voluntarily appeared for interviews and with -- interviews with mr. martin and and voluntarily produced documents in their possession. the members requested recusal pause, one, they believe that out of an abundance of caution and to avoid even an appearance of unfairness, their voluntary recusal will eliminate the possibility of questions being raised as to the partiality or bias of the committee members considering this matter, two, they want to assure the public the house, and representative waters that this investigation is continuing in a fair and unbiased matter, and three, they want to move this matter forward in a manner that supports the gravest -- greatest public confidence in the ultimate conclusions of the committee. .

they recognize a recusal is an extremely rare occurrence. while the members believe that they each can render an impartial and unbiased decision in any proceeding relating to this matter, the committee takes this extraordinary measure and this unique circumstance to further the best interest of the house as to permit this matter to be brought to a conclusion. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will suspend. >> mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. would members respectfully take their conversations from the floor, clear the aisles, clear the well. the clerk shall continue. the clerk: voluntary recusal of six members. therefore members of the committee who have requested recusal are representative joe bonnor representative linda t.

sanchez, representative michael t. mccaul, representative kay michael conaway representative charles w. dent, and representative greg harper. the committee has unanimously accepted and approved these requests. furthermore, outside counsel has discovered no evidence indicating bias or partiality on the part of former members or requiring the exclusion of any former members of the committee from serving as substitute members. however, out of an abundance of caution and for the same reasons as the current members volunteering their recusal mr. barton has recommended that no member who served on the committee in the 111th congress should serve as a substitute member in this matter. in addition, to the same reason no current committee staff who had previously worked on the matter before will be involved in further proceedings in this matter. the committee has taken these steps pursuant to house rule 11 clause 3-b-5 and committee rule

9-3. accordingly i request that -- 9-e. accordingly i request that six substitute members be appointed. these substitute members will serve the committee only for purpose of bringing the matter of representative waters to a fair and just conclusion. their service of the substitute members will end with the conclusion of the matter of representative waters. i shall remain chairman of the committee. representative sanchez shall remain the ranking member. and all other recused members will continue to serve on the committee for all other purposes. signed sincerely, joe bonnor, chairman. -- jo bonner chairman. the speaker pro tempore: the chair announces the speaker's designation of the following members to act in any proceeding in the committee on ethics relating to matter of representative maxine waters. the clerk: mr. goodlatte, mr. latourette, mr. simpson, mrs. capito, mr. grich of arkansas, and -- grinch of arkansas, and mr. -- griffin of arkansas, and mr. sarbanes.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition. >> mr. speaker, i send to the desk a resolution and ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration in the house. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the resolution. the clerk: house resolution 558 resolution directing the clerk of the house of representatives to provide a copy of the on the record portions of the audio backup file of the deposition of william r. clemons that was conducted by the committee on oversight and government reform on february 5, 2008 to the prosecuting attorneys in the case of united states of america vs. clemons, number 110-c.r.-00223-rbwddc. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the consideration of the resolution? without objection, the resolution is agreed and the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. mr. dreier: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. dreier: i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourns today it adjourn to

meet on tuesday, february 21, 2012, when the house adjourns on that day it adjourn to meet at 10:00 a.m. on friday, february 24 2012. and when the house adjourns on that day, it adjourn to meet at 2:00 p.m. on monday, february 27, 2012. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. so ordered. the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. frank: i ask unanimous consent that my name be removed as a co-responsible juror of h.r. 3086. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. the gentlelady from kansas. ms. jenkins: i rise to ask unanimous consent to remove my name from h.r. 1964, the conservation easements. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. so ordered. the chair now now will general tain request for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition. >> mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: thank you, mr.

speaker. mr. speaker, recreational therapy embraces a definition of health which includes not only the absence of illness but extends to enhancement of physical cognitive emotional social, and leisure development. this caring profession touches the lives of individuals across the nation. personally witnessed our recreational therapy provides independence and dignity in the lives of those facing life changing disease and disability. these services are provided by professionals nationally certified by the national council for therapeutic certification. as certified therapeutic recreation specialists. every day countless individuals face rebuilding lives. these individuals benefit from compassion and cost-effective care of a certified therapeutic recreation specialist. recreational therapy improves an individual's function and keep them as active, health y.y, and independent as possible. at a time when we need cost-effective health care i urge my colleagues to support the recognition of recreational

services specifically in satisfying the inpatient rehab insensitive service requirement. i congratulate the caring professionals of the profession for the services they provide every day. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from maryland rise. >> to address the house. request permission to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, day seven since the loss of religious freedom for americans guaranteed under the first amendment. mr. harris: we know that last friday when the final rule was issued by the department of health it would be identical to the rule issued last september with no further accommodations for individuals of faith. mr. speaker, yesterday on day six of the loss of religious freedom for americans guaranteed under the first amendment, outside the white house the catholic priest and presbyterian minister were arrested for protesting that loss of religious freedom when they knelt to pray for the

restoration of religious freedom. yes, mr. speaker it is now illegal in the united states to kneel and pray in front of the white house for the restoration of religious freedom. these americans had to pay a $100 fine for exercising their religious freedom in front of the white house. mr. speaker, you know if they were occupied protesters i guess they would put a tent over them they would be immune from anything happening to them, but they weren't occupy protesters. they were there to kneel and pray for the restoration of their religious freedom. i hope we don't go past day seven of that loss of freedom. i yield back the time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, please. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. kaptur: yes, mr. speaker. i rise today to join my sisters in the state of ohio, women elected officials, small business owners, women activists across our state to speak out

against a tax on the ability of women to get full health coverage in this country. imagine we can land a astronaut on the moon, we can target and eliminate osama bin laden, but we can't seem to figure out as a society how to make sure that women have full health choices in the insurance programs of our country. it seems that some people just want to keep women in the corner and not see the struggles that they have had in preventive health care, in full choice for the medications that they take in order that they be able to live full and productive lives. our grandmother had 16 children. several of them died. she lived to the age of 93. in those days there were almost no medications and more women died in childbirth than were lost and soldiers were lost in world war i. i think the world has moved beyond closed thinking on women's health.

i stand with my sisters in ohio. i yield back my remaining time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. poe: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. poe: mr. speaker, for years the federal government keeps sneaking in taxes into airline tickets. the airlines cannot put on the ticket all those hidden taxes because the law won't let them do so. for example, when you buy a product normally you know how much the product is, and then you know how much the taxes are. but not so with airlines. here's a typical ticket, mr. speaker. it starts out with $200 that's going to the airlines. but the federal government sneak in at least 11, 11 taxes raising the price to $374.95. almost another half of the ticket is federal taxes. that doesn't even count four more taxes to add on to the

airlines. and the airline when they make the ticket all you see is the $374.95. because the law won't let the airlines tell the truth about the taxation of our government. when more taxes are added, the ticket price continues to go up. congressman graves from georgia has introduced legislation to stop this nonsense. leapt's have transparency. let's see how much those taxes are on an airline ticket. it's time we stop the hide and seek with taxpayer taxes. that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas rise? the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: i'm very proud to stand with i.b.w. in my district, the brotherhood of electrical workers, when they challenged a company that is in fact doing poor work in our city. so much so that the city electrical inspector had to shut them down.

when are we going to be for our workers and to help them? i rise today to indicate my support for the payroll tax legislation that just passed. it was in essence after long months of negotiation and pleading for the 160 million people to get a payroll tax relief and get those who are unemployed seeking work to get their due in unemployment insurance. it does have the opportunity for 99 weeks for those in districts that are suffering from unemployment. it doesn't take any money from medicare. it doesn't raise the benefits. and certainly it doesn't require those onerous burdens of unemployment, g.e.d., and drug testing except in certain circumstances. why in the heck did we have to burden our federal employees by taking the fat and taking the skin off their backs to pay for this bill? let's respect and know that our federal employees serve us. let's get a better policy to be

able to help americans provide for the unemployment and yet not put the pain and burden on federal employees. i oppose that. will continue to oppose that. but i'm glad that there are those who get payroll tax relief and unemployment relief. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise. >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you mr. speaker. i stand before you to congratulate an outstanding young leader in my community, daniel gasada. in december of 2001 when daniel was only 13 months old, he was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, an inherited chronic disease that affects the lungs and digestive system of about 30,000 children and adults in the united states. mr. rivera: today daniel is a fifth grade student at our lady of the lakes catholic school.

and is an accomplished runner who continuously finishes in the top at district races. daniel continues to amaze doctors every day with how well he runs and his ability to exercise with ease. starting march 24 at amelia air hart park, daniel willar tiss pate in a series of 5-k races in south florida raising awayness for his fight against cystic fibrosis. i'm sure the south florida community will go out and participate in this event and show support for daniel in his battle against this disease. anyone interested in getting information can log on to www.runningwithdanny.com. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> permission to address the house for one minute. revise and extend i the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank

mr. green: thank you mr. speaker. i rise to speak in support of the rights of women. i do this because we live in a world where it's not enough for things to be right, they must also look right. it doesn't look right for us to conduct a hearing dealing with the rights of women and not, n-o-t, and not have a woman on the panel. we would not dare conduct such a hearing discussing the rights of men and not, n-o-t not have a man on the panel. it is not enough for things to be right, they must also look right. some may argue it was right. i will always argue it was not and that it did not look right. we must make the adjustment so women can make decisions about their rights. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute.

>> thank you, mr. speaker. in stopping iran 2012 will be as critical a year as ever. but we here in this chamber speak as one. we can drive the conversation all around the world. mr. dold: that does mean something because the united states must lead the world. it is an abdication of our responsibility and leadership if we leave the iranian threat to anyone else. this iranian regime is already the leading state sponsor of terrorism in the world. they bear responsibility for killing american soldiers in iraq and afghanistan. they fuel say asaud's slauth for the sir qua, they were behind the assassination plot right here in washington, d.c. now imagine what they'd do under a nuclear umbrella of their own. this is why we this congress and this administration must anticipate what comes next. we must establish that containment has no place at the table. such a policy places us as the mercy of a madman and it would

unleash unparalleled consequence, the likes of which the world has never seen. this is what's at stake. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon rise? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. blumenauer: as we recess, i'm hopeful members will go back to their districts and talk to them about the failed transportation bill that has mercifully been pulled back from the floor. my republicans colleagues decided for the first time in history to put forth a partisan transportation bill, never had a hearing, that would have gutted transit, it would have reversed 20 years of transportation reform, it would have even eliminated the wildly popular safe routes to school program.

i would hope they go back and talk to contractors, their local government officials, parents in the p.t.a. to understand why those programs are important, why that bill is flawed, why america deserves a better bipartisan, visionary transportation bill to rebuild and renew america and put our people back to work. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. dreier: it's not difficult to believe our florida colleague, connie mac, could become a grandfather but what is shocking is that our youthful and beautiful california colleague mary bono mac has become a grandmother. -- mary bono machas -- mack has

become a grandmother. to mary's daughter was born sonny william mabee. what is interesting to note is while this 8 pound, four ounce baby boy was born on february 16, february 16 was the date of his grandfather's birthday, and february 16 was the date of sonny bono's father, so sonny william rabee's great grandfather and grandfather share the exact same date, february 16, of birth that he has. so congratulations go to the parents, shiana and mark and all our colleagues and friends in the bono mac family and -- bono mack family and we look forward to having the chance to

meet sonny william sometime soon. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. let me speak to transportation and what we're doing in congress on the republican side. mr. mica: the other side of the aisle, the democrat majority, had responsibility over transportation and huge majorities for four years and control for two years of the white house, the senate, the house of representatives. this week the president signed into law and we got it done, as the cable guy says, we're going to git'r done. the president signed this in the dark, he failed to send me a bouquet of flowers or candy on valentine's day when he did it. he didn't want the people to

know that we succeeded in getting legislation responsible for 10% of our economy done and we got it done without tax increases, culting $3,700 subsidies for airline tickets. we'll do the same thing with the transportation bill. it will put people to work and lower energy costs. so mr. speaker there's more, as paul harvey said, there's the rest of the story, and that's part of the story i came to tell you and the rest of the country and the congress. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: are there further requests for one-minute speeches? under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011 the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.

mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. one of the things going on in the mideast -- a lot of things going on in the mideast, a lot of things needing to be addressed at this point. i have great concerns with the man for the which this administration is handling the things in the mideast. maybe continuing with the policy on international affairs of this administration, which is apparently, from what we see them doing, if you've been an ally to the united states, if you've been our friend, if you have fought with us, if you have had friends and family that fought with us and lost their lives then this administration's message is, we're going to throw you under

the bus, and we're going to negotiate and help your enemy and our enemy. so it almost looks like the best thing to do for people in the united states that want help from the federal government, move to an island, declare war against the united states and then this administration will send you all kinds of money and help, buy you an office in qatar, all kinds of things they're willing to do if you're an enemy. one of the latest things to be occurring this week -- occurring, this week we're hearing reports from egypt after this administration threw an ally with whom agreements had been signed, negotiations continued to be ongoing with mubarak in egypt, the man wasn't a teddy bear by any stretch of the imagination but

he had had some success in keeping some semblance of peace with israel, and yet this administration was quick to tell mubarak as our ally, he had to get out, kind of the way president carter failed to support another guy that was not a nice man, but the shah in iran, and the carter administration also welcomed the return from exile of a man commonly called the itoe la -- the ayatollah khomeini, the carter administration welcomed him as a man of peace. as a result of that, americans lost lives and will continue to lose lives. there was nothing mean about

that decision by the carter administration, they just dfpblet know what they were doing. now we're see regular ports that the muslim brotherhood in egypt, who certainly made clear from their actions they are not our friends, they are certainly not a friend of israel, they've been making noise for some time that they did not intend to recognize israel, they did not want to keep the peace treaty with israel and in fact there's an article from february 14 of 2011 by dean reynolds from cbs interactive, that points out that egypt's influential muslim brotherhood this was supposedly before the arab spring even, never supported the camp david accords and a leading secular politician says they should be renegotiated. so the people that this

administration has been so out front in welcoming, sending people over there, those that have been able to get out and come back, that aren't being hold by this obviously anti-american government that is taking shape are indicating at least those in the administration, gee, we've got to send a bunch of money to egypt, we're going to try to buy them off and buy their allegiance. i've been saying for many years now, every term since i've been here, something that should be clear to all americans, when it comes to all this money that we throw at people around the world, that hate our guts that want to see the united states brought down places where they laughed when 3,000 americans were killed on 9/11, we're

sending them money and the thing i've been saying ever since i got to congress is you don't have to pay people to hate you. they will do it for free. i had a u.n. voting accountability bill that i filed in each congress, got over 100 votes at one point, and hopefully that will continue to grow. the bill is very simple. and it follows the adage that i've been saying for all these years, you don't have to pay people to hate you, they'll do it for free. so the bill is very simple. any nation that votes against the united states' position in the u.n. more than 50% of the time would get no money, no assistance of any kind, from the united states. these countries are autonomous they're independence -- independent, they're free to make whatever decisions they wish. but if they're going to be

anti-american and be against all of the human rights positions that we hold dear, whether it's for religious -- religion or gender, as we see women's rights being abused so badly around the world in countries where -- we're pouring in money as we see in areas in the world where we have poured in hundreds of billions of dollars and yet they are doing all they can to eliminate churches some of been successful, to persecute christians and jews, and yet we continue to pour in money. well, since we've seen the position of this administration being anti-religious here in recent days, it's starting to come together and make more sense. this administration is simply

being consistent. we admire consistency. but when they want to send money to countries that persecute christians and persecute those who want to worship freely, i guess that's consistent with what has been done in the president's obamacare bill. and the latest pronouncement that catholics just needed to set aside their religious beliefs because they were inconsistent with what the president wanted done. let's see, we've got an article here from february 18 of 2011 this says, the headline, from reuters, peace treaty with israel is up to the egyptian people. this was a year ago. the spokesman for egypt's muslim brotherhood responds to u.s. national intelligence director, who said he had

assumed brotherhood was not in favor of maintaining a peace treaty with israel. that was a nice thing for this administration to plant in the head of the egyptians, the muslim brotherhood taking control in egypt, that, gee, we kind of just assumed you wouldn't want to support the treaty with israel. well, that allowed the egyptian muslim brotherhood to say you know what? gee, we thought you were going to be upset with us if we didn't support the treaty with israel, but thanks for letting us know that when you helped us take over, we wouldn't support israel being there. great move. great move. but that was director of national intelligence james clapper, he said, quote, i

would assess that they, the muslim brotherhood in egypt are not in favor of the treaty unquote. what kind of diplomatic fiasco is that? we go to september 12, 2011. headline this september 12, 2011, article when they passed the 10-year anniversary of 9/11, headline muslim brotherhood. egypt-israel peace treaty needs to be reviewed. subtitle. israel tells the peace treaty is of great importance, says israel generally does not honor the agreement. and then they quote mahmoud hussein, the group's secretary

general, as saying that like other agreements this one needs to be renude. -- reviewed and is in the hands of the parliament. there are others in which they called some in egypt in a position of power have called for the complete elimination of any agreement with israel. there are those who've said well, let's have -- put it up to a national vote, and since the muslim brotherhood is all about israel no longer existing and since the muslim brotherhood has taken a majority, a slim majority but a majority in the government there in egypt, then it would seem that it's likely their position would prevail. so all of those years, the one crowning glory that the carter administration could point to, the camp david accords, this

administration's even thrown the carter administration under the bus just like they have some of our allies like the northern alliance in afghanistan, like those who were loyal to americans in iraq , like the kurds in many ways in northern iraq like israel for example, in the manner of which we treated them publicly. it was may two years ago this administration did what some thought was unthinkable, that this administration or any administration would never do, they voted with all of israel's enemies in slapping israel demanding they disclose their weaponry particularly nuclear weapons, if any that they have. we've never done that before,

and for those that bother to look in the old testament or the jewish bible, the old testament to some of us, and you read the account of hezakyle welcoming leaders from babylon, and isaiah was sent there and asked -- he knew the answer but he asked him what he had done. in essence the king of israel said, well these wonderful leaders -- of course this is texas paraphrase -- these wonderful leaders came over from babylon and so i showed them all our treasure, and i showed them all our defenses, our armaments. and in essence isaiah said, you fool you've done this

you'll lose the country. now, there are some in the administration who said, gee, if you are completely open about our defenses and what all we have, you bring people on, let them review your nuclear submarines let them see the abilities we have for -- you bring them to our military bases and show them how we operate, show them our tactics, that they'll just all of a sudden fall in love with us and it will make us stronger. the lesson throughout history including the one the king of israel and his sons had to learn the wrong way -- the hard way, rather, is you don't show your enemies all your defenses. you don't climb in to political relationships with those who want to destroy you, with those

who want to destroy your best friends. it's not a good message. al qaeda -- here's an article from fox news -- al qaeda on the rise in syria, has a marriage of convenience with iran, u.s. intelligence director says. well i would think that was pretty obvious. glad someone with our intelligence department has been able to figure that out. hopefully they'll be able to figure that out with regard to lebanon. hopefully our intelligence department will be able to figure out with regard to iraq that the leader in iraq who has shown hostility to this government and people in this government to the point when five of us were over there

bipartisan group and we had a couple questions that maliki did not particularly appreciate. one that, hey, there were people that were assuring us back in 2001, 2002, 2003 that if we came and got rid of this terrible dictator that hated the united states named saddam hussein, that because iraq was so oil rich that once we were able to turn the country back over to the iraqi people after resting, in a way, from a totalitarian dictator who killed and abused, tortured iraqi citizens, that iraq would be so grateful once the oil got to flowing they would help eliminate some of the vast amount of treasure that americans spent to allow them to elect their own leaders, to allow them to elect their

leader like maliki. well, he was deeply offended, it appeared, as he was when i brought up camp ashroff and the maltreatment, in fact, the killing of residents of camp ashroff who were iranian refugees, but the concern was the united states had promised the residents of camp ashraf, the iranian refugees in iraq, that we would make sure they were protected. and when maliki's government took over from us, he himself promised camp ashraf residents that he and his government would make sure they were safe. maliki promised the united states that he would keep them safe, and yet apparently the pressure from iran and the fear that iran has instilled in the leadership particularly

maliki, in iraq is so profound that since he knew president obama had made clear we were pulling out completely, we weren't going to be around to protect them to help them, we were getting out completely, we were not going to be around to make sure that our investment of american lives and treasure was not wasted, we were pulling out, leaving everything to him going to leave everything to chance despite the investment maliki showed no gratitude. in fact hostility, and in fact when our group of five bipartisan members of congress were on our way flying out on one of the luxurious c-130's -- i am prone to sarcasm. the c-130's, they're no better than they were when i was in the army 30 years ago. you're sitting on webbed seating just like the

paratroopers sit in, same c-130's, we got word by radio that maliki's government said that we were no longer welcomed in his country. the man seems to have thrown in with iran, and i hope before long -- i know we have some brilliant intelligence officers. i've interacted with some of our intelligence community. i'm quite impressed with the intelligence of many of our intelligence officers, and ipe' hopeful that the intelligence at the lower levels of our intelligence agencies will eventually affect those in top positions in our intelligence agencies and so they will begin to realize what others have known for a very long time. in afghanistan, i understand

president car -- karzai is not terribly pleased with the position some of us have taken but some of us are not terribly taken with the positions of the karzai government in throwing in -- well, at least accommodating the taliban, accommodating those who are supplying the taliban accommodating those who are supplying the taliban and the taliban itself as they continue to plot and kill americans. but in fairness to president karzai when you look at his situation president obama's made clear the united states is completely getting out of afghanistan and we're going to leave them just as we did iraq,

just as the democratic congress demanded in 1974 from vietnam. we were going to leave our allies, those who had fought with us and assisted us, lost family friends treasure to support our position because they were enemies of our enemy. this administration was going to leave them high and dry, and this administration's already shown in iraq that's what happens. so from president car sghy's position,ess -- karzai's position, he's got to be sitting there, they're about to leave, the taliban has gotten stronger and stronger with pakistan's supplying and assisting them, the united states will not be here to protect me. gee, maybe i better start being nicer to the taliban and the radical elements in the

pakistan government because that's who's going to determine whether i stay in power or not. i found out in a meeting with some afghan officials from the northern alliance and have done subsequent research since, the government of afghanistan has about $12.5 billion budget and they themselves collect enough revenue, taxes and what not in afghanistan that they're able to supply about $1.5 billion of their $12.5 billion budget. the rest comes from other countries and most of that is from the united states. it was interesting traveling around afghanistan before new year's, after new year's going to forward operating bases talking to some of our troops.

we got some terrific folks on the ground over there, but there is a problem. those of us who majored in history, those of us who have bothered to read any history have learnedes that a tough area in which to be an occupier as a foreign country. foreign countries occupying or trying to occupy in afghanistan don't do very well. it's not a place we ought to be occupying. so i hear some like some in this administration, sounds like they're throwing up their hands saying, let's just get out and let happen whatever is going to happen because they know occupying forces don't do well. they're right about that. but by simply withdrawing without using some intelligence and some lessons from history

means we may have to fight the taliban again and it may again be after massive loss of american lives and perhaps the next time it will be when they're armed with nuclear weapons where they can kill hundreds of thousands instead of thousands. of course, if you read the communications that were intercepted about 9/11 they were hopeful there for a while that there were maybe 50,000 people in the twin towers that were going to be killed, they hoped were killed when the planes crashed into the twin towers in new york city. they didn't care about assistant -- innocent american lives or all this foreign visiting folks that were in the twin towers. they could care less. they wanted to make a point and make a point by killing tens of thousands. well with the inappropriate

strategy of this government, of this administration, the obama administration we could end up having this nation pay a far greater price than has even been paid to date. unfortunately, there are consequences for bad decisions. it is important that we select proper leadership in this country. anybody that reads through the book of hosea finds a verse never had it jump out as it did a few weeks ago, and there are different translations but i like the translation in which the communication from fwod to hosea was, he was angry with the people of israel because he said they had chosen leaders

who were not god's choice. there needs to be a lot more praying in this country as we select our leaders, as we select our national leaders for president and for his administration, for those who are elected to congress for those who are elected to the senate, for those who are selected in -- elected in state and local elections and a lesson for us in congress that we elect within congress the proper leaders. because as the founders believed, we are endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, one third of the 56,000 signers of the declaration of independence were not just christians, they were ordained ministers. one of the signs of the declaration has a translation of the bible still found in print today. these people understood the

lessons from history. and they did not want to make those mistakes. here we have february 13 an article by patrick goodenow entitled mask leaders promises iran never to recognize israel. we've had some in this country new york this administration, who have indicated, you know privately, they say, we don't really have to worry. sunnis and shias hate each other. they're never going to come together. so that can help keep one from getting too much power because there is that conflict. well, because in small part, the small part is growing to larger part due to the some of the actions and inactions of this administration shias and

sunnis are coming together. and so here you have a hamas gaza leader, ismail hannea, delivering a speech at a rally in tehran iran, last saturday, marking the 33rd anniversary of the islamic revolution, and he is speaking and behind him are the portraits of the supreme leader ayatollah khomeini and his predecessor. and here he is, in the gaza strip, as a leader of the terrorist organization hamas, and he's speaking on behalf of iranian leaders. we are bringing shia and sunni together like people 10 years

ago would never have believed possible. by the ineptitude of what's happening in this administration. but the article points out amid growing speculation of the split within the top ranks of hamas, iranian leaders urged terrorist groups, gaza lead -- the terrorist group's gaza leader to continue its violent resistance and pledged continuing financial support. a terrorist group of leaders pledging to support terrorist hamas leaders in the gaza strip and the supreme leader ayatollah khomeini told the gaza hamas leader people do not expect anything except endurance from palestine's resistance. it's time to wake up to what's

going on with this administration. and their help for groups that hate america, that hate israel. here's an article from february 12 who says brotherhood lawmakers -- says usaid to cairo -- says brotherhood lawmakers says usaid to cairo assured. he's gotten an assurance from this administration that if the usaid to egypt, it would be a violation of the 1979 peace accords. they've indicated they're not interested in keeping the 1979 peace accords. yes, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the president of the united states. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: mr. secretary. the secretary: i'm directed by

the president of the united states to deliver to the house of representatives a message in writing. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas may proceed. i thank the gentleman. mr. gohmert: always glad to get messages from the president of the united states. and we hope this will be a helpful one. here's an article from february 13 muslim brotherhood warns u.s. aid cut may affect egypt's peace treaty with israel but apparently they're getting assurances, we're going to make sure you keep getting money from us you hate our gut you hate israel you want israel gone, so you know, hey, we're going to keep supporting you. and in fact, another article, february 13 of this year, headline reads, obama proposes $800 million in aid for, quote, arab spring, unquote. we've seen what the arab spring has done.

if you were a christian while mubarak was in power, there was some persecution. and it wasn't pretty. but now all semblance of any efforts to allow christians to worship freely in egypt is gone. we saw a headline last year that the last public christian church in afghanistan had to be closed. we continue to pour in aid. here's a february 8, 2012, headline pentagon counters dem assessment of afghan war. then there's another article, the afghanistan report, the pentagon doesn't -- the afghanistan report the pentagon doesn't want you to read, by michael hastings. there's one by lieutenant colonel daniel davis, truth lies, and afghanistan, how military leaders have let us

done. here's one from february 10 of this year 2012, roads to nowhere. program to win over afghans fails. in talking to some of our troops in forward positions in afghanistan, some were a bit down. particularly those who have been training afghans to farm. because we are sending around $3 billion for nothing but projects in afghanistan, including these type of farming projects, so people can make their own way. yet we were told they're training the afghans, they've been training the afghans, but the billions of dollars the united states government the obama administration has sent to afghanistan to help them develop farming projects, at least in this one region has never gotten past the corrupt

regional government. so the projects where they could use these farming skills that are being taught don't exist. and they're not anticipated to exist. we set up a corrupt government in afghanistan. and i don't know how honest anybody in the karzai regime was before they got there, but there should be a lesson that can be learned from king david, the only person mentioned in the bible to have had a heart after god's own, that when there is no accountability, even the best among us can do terrible things. so when you set up a government in afghanistan and we, the united states, supported their constitution that said sharia law rule, which meant they were not going to be anymore christian churches in

afghanistan and now there are not. not publicly. and jews have had to flee from afghanistan, last report i read said there was one publicly acknowledged jew in afghanistan with all the blood and treasure we shared -- shed to eliminate the taliban, the taliban has now come back and now this administration has announced to the world, to the taliban, look, we will release all the people we have in detention that have murdered american troops, we'll let them come back. they can keep murdering when we let them go. we'll even buy you a wonderful office in qatar if you'll just come talk to us. that is the kind of proposals that everybody has heard and that's what is allow -- has allowed taliban leaders, as one of them did in afghanistan

earlier this month, announce to all of afghanistan and the largest television station, look, we're about to be in charge as soon as the american government leaves, so here's the deal. the american government is -- they basically acknowledged we've whipped them they've lost, so they're doing everything they can to get us to come negotiate. so here's the situation. if you have not been totally supportive of the taliban here in afghanistan they say, then it's time to come to us, ask forgiveness and ask for our providing safety for you. because if you don't, when we take over, as soon as the u.s. pulls out, you know, you're in trouble. and the result could be the death penalty. do we have another

announcement? the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been informed by the senate to that the senate has agreed to the conference report accompanying h.r. 3630, an act to provide incentives for the creation of jobs and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas may continue. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. there is a way around totally abandoning the investment we had for a peaceful afghanistan without a powerful taliban. it's common sense. you see it throughout history. what you do is support friends

who are enemies of your enemy. the taliban is our enemy. we know that the taliban can be defeated because they were when we had less than 1,500 american troops in afghanistan, special ops guys, incredibly trained, and some of our best intelligence officers over there. from our intelligence agencies. obviously not top intelligence officials because these guys were really competence and they whipped the taliban. had them completely on the run. then we kind of took our eye off the ball in afghanistan, started looking at iraq. and the taliban has made a resurgence. and they've become powerful again in afghanistan. and in meeting with leaders from the northern alliance, even though secretary clinton and former secretary albright

did what they could to keep us from meeting because apparently when this administration throws our allies urn our bus, this administration wants them to stay under the bus. some of us believe if somebody has been our ally, has helped fight our enemy, then they need to remain our friends. these are muslims, these are our friends, and their enemy is our enemy. and i'm told by some of the military -- american military leaders that northern alliance has plenty of weapons but they don't have all the weapons they had when they defeated the taliban before. we do not have to stay in afghanistan. if we do not want to come back and fight the taliban again, the thing to do is rearm and reempower the enemy of our enemies. afghanistan has never been a strong and never had a strong

central government. what made us in our arrogance think we could force a strong centralized government that would work in that country, it is a very tribal nation. in the northern area, this administration wants to call our allies, our former allies warlords, war criminals, blood on their hands. they were fighting for us and with us. so in this administration's effort to manipulate the u.s. media, they leak all kinds of stories about how terrible our allies were. they're fighting terrible people. they're fighting people who were training others to come kill thousands and thousands of americans. these are not nice people and war is not a pleasant thing. the northern alliance leaders

had two asks. one, let us have -- help us get a constitution amended so that we get to elect our regional leaders. each province in afghanistan should be able to elect their local governors. each province should be able to elect the mayors of the towns within that province. let them select their own police chief. let them do as the united states came together to do, not so much in 1983 with articles of confederation, but in 1987 with our u.s. constitution that allowed people to elect local government officials, state government officials and national officials. we have a constitution that's been set up in afghanistan that basically lets the karzai administration appoint the regional governors the mayors

they select the police chiefs. that is a system fraught with corruption. no matter how honest anybody was going in, including president karzai, how in the world could you stay honest and above corruption when you have set up a system that lends itself to corruption? well, that's what's happening. it doesn't seem so much to ask. let the northern alliance as every other area of afghanistan, elect their local leaders, elect their governors. and then those regional areas become strong again, and then just as states, fuss when the federal government of the united states tries to get too powerful as we've seen with obamacare, let's empower those regional provential governments in afghanistan to be powerful enough to call down their

national leaders when they are corrupt. let's empower them to fix their own problems and you don't have to have massive numbers of american troops to do that, but you do have to be smart in the way you deal with a country that has lots of your enemies that want to kill you. so they ask, let us elect our local, regional leaders, give us enough equipment where we can defeat the taliban again for you and for us. now, in meeting and talking to people in afghanistan, they knew as did the leaders in southern pakistan that the taliban is being supplied and equipped with armaments i.e.d.'s that are dismembering and killing our soldiers in afghanistan are being supplied

through the southern area of pakistan. this is an area of pakistan that wasn't pakistan until 1948 when international leaders, arbitrarily took pencils and just drew boundary lines and they included most of balastan in with pakistan. they don't want to be there. they have a very mineral rich area that is supplying pakistan with most of their minerals and yet the pakistan government is so badly mistreating the people. they raid, they torture, they terrorize the people in southern pakistan. and they terribly mistreat our muslim friends in southern pakistan then it's time to

push for an independent nation of muslim friends of the united states and we will remain their friends because their enemy is our enemy, and we won't have to sacrifice american troops and american lives and massive amounts of american treasure like we've been doing. you simply empower the enemy of our enemy and let them do the work for us. that is the solution, that would be in keeping with holding dear the american lives that have been lost in fighting the taliban in afghanistan. that would be true to our beliefs and our desire only to fight those who want to destroy what we are and who we are.

that would truly honor those who have given so much in honor of this country. and with that, mr. speaker, i have a friend, mr. mo brooks here, i'd like to yield back so mr. brooks can be recognized. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 5 2011, the gentleman from alabama mr. brooks, is recognized for the remainder of the hour as the designee of the majority leader. the gentleman has 15 minutes remaining. mr. brooks: thank you, mr. speaker. in the house today h.r. 3630, the so-called payroll tax holiday, passed, later it passed the united states senate meaning it passed the united states congress. but on the house floor today i joined 91 other republican

budget hawks, each of whom shares my concern for the financial stability of our nation and they risked have a federal government insolvency and bankruptcy. each of us budget hawks voted no. in december, 2011, alabama senators and jeff sessions and i voted no on the payroll tax bill. i am pleased today that i was part of united republican delegation from the state of alabama to vote no on h.r. 3630. robert aderholt, republican from haitiville, voted no. spencer bachus, republican from birmingham voted no. mike rogers, republican from anniston, voted no. martha roby, republican from montgomery, voted no. jo bonner, republican from mobile voted no.

senator richard shelby voted no. alabama senator jeff sessions voted no. each of these individual congressmen and senators voted no, again, because they share a deep-rooted concern for the financial stability of our country and the impact this legislation can have on that. in sum, i voted against h.r. 3630 for a variety of reasons, but i'm going to mention three. first, h.r. 3630 disproportionately targets and burdens american federal workers, takes their hard-earned money and diverts it those who don't work for it. that's not fair. that's not good policy. second, america's seniors have asked me to protect social security and medicare benefits because they paid for and earned them during their working lifetimes. americans support social

security because everyone contributes their fair share to their own social security retirement benefits. social security is not welfare. social security is an earned entitlement. h.r. 3630 undermines social security's and medicare's foundation by threatening 10% funding cuts totaling $120 billion per year which will, if continued beyond this fiscal year breach america's commitment to our elderly and will force significant social security and medicare benefit cuts. we cannot expect the benefits while cutting the revenue that provides those benefits. third and most importantly, the name middle class tax relief which is on the title of h.r. 3630 is deceptive and it is false. there is no tax cut.

rather mr. speaker, i want the american people to understand that it is 100% a loan. let me delve into that a little bit deeper, but as i do so let me mention this. in the private sector, if a commercial institution had done what congress did today, it would constitute flagrant violations of truth in advertising, truth in lending and deceptive practices statutes. but as we all know, washington is all too often immune from such constraints. h.r. 3630 is false advertising and deceptive because it is not a tax cut. h.r. 3630 is a loan that risks america's solvency and which the american people must pay back with interest. in this regard, the congressional budget office and joint committee on taxation reports two troubling aspects of h.r. 3630.

first, according to the c.b.o. and j.c.t.'s estimate, enacting h.r. 3630 would change revenues and direct spending to produce increases in the deficit of 101.1 billion dollars in fiscal year 2012. $101.1 billion in fiscal year 2012, and we're already four or five months through with this fiscal year, so that gives you an idea of what it is like for the remainder. further, h.r. 3630 would direct the office of management and budget to exclude the budgetary effects of h.r. 3630 from its scorecard of balances under the statutory pay-as-you-go act of 2010. so what is h.r. 3630 doing? well it's instructing the office of management and budget

to not count the deficit impact of this legislation on its full scorecard of balances. in sum the congressional budget office reports and confirms that every penny of so-called tax cut must be paid back with interest. now where i come from, if you're giving money you have to pay back with interest, that is called a loan. and that is exactly what the american people will have to do. my parents taught me about debt. debt never rests. debt is working against you 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 52 weeks a year for however many years it takes you to pay it off in full. too much debt enslaves you. your creditors and your debt become your masters. you become their servant. this is what debt does to every american family and it is doing that slowly but surely to america. as you all know, we blew

through the $15 trillion debt mark in november of 2011, and sometime this year we are going to blow by the $16 trillion debt mark. that debt is not free. there is no free lunch. according to the c.b.o. report h.r. 3630 racks up debt at the rate of over $12 billion per month in f.y. 2012. now, if i had a printed copy of h.r. 3630, but you know the speed of this place sometimes does not empower you to have that according to the c.b.o. report, if we had printed h.r. 3630 on sheets of gold, which we probably should have because it costs american taxpayers roughly $500 million per page in additional debt burden and payments that's the cost of that bill per page. why would washington do this to

america? what is washington's motive for this deception? why don't we call things what they are? why do we call a payroll tax a payroll tax rather than a social security and medicare funding tax which is what it really is? the answer is simple. pandering to voters and the 2012 elections. why does washington use the phrase payroll tax rather than what so-called payroll taxes are, social security and medicare funding taxes? because polls show voters don't understand what the payroll tax is, but by golly they know what social security and medicare funding taxes are. . yet 100% of the so-called tax cuts in h.r. 3630 are cuts to social security and medicare funding taxes. in other words washington politicians use the phrase payroll tax because they know using the more accurate phrase social security tax, would cause american voters to rise up to

protect our social security and medicare system. worse yet h.r. 3630 deceives america's working families into believing they are reaping a windfall when in fact they are being saddled with a burden. a burden that will hamstring our children grandchildren and america's future with another layer of heavy taxing, onerous debt. what washington won't tell the american people is that h.r. 3630 is another debt busting bill that further empowers china and other american creditors to become our master while enslaving america and the american people with generations of oppressive debt burden payments. mr. speaker, america yearns for leadership. leadership that involves adult, mature conversations with american voters about the financial condition we are in and what h.r. 3630 is really

about. there's simply too many in washington who pander to voters in an election year for political gain. h.r. 3630, mr. speaker, i would submit represents the worst of washington not the best and not what the people deserve. i cannot speak for other congressmen, but as for me today i and 90 other republican budget hawks stood strong for america's future. we voted to kill h.r. 3630, stop the deception, stop pandering to voters and save america from yet another mountain of oppressive debt that threatens us with insolvency and bankruptcy. mr. speaker, i yield the remainder of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the

chair recognizes the gentleman from maryland, mr. bartlett, for 30 minutes. mr. bartlett: thank you, mr. speaker. when i looked at the television this morning and crawler across the top of one of our station, i noticed that oil was $103 a barrel. $103 a barrel and we are in a recession. what's happening here? so i've got a chart here that goes back a few years, it ends in 2008, and there we have oil something less than $100 a barrel. but if you extended this chart out just a little bit, you would see that it had jumped up to

$147 a barrel and that's of course aided by the housing bubble collapse. the economy came tumbling down and the price of oil dropped down to something under -- about $140 a barrel. now it's crept back up slowly, slowly as supply was not able to keep up with demand until we now have oil at $103 a barrel. and we are in a recession. this is an interesting chart because it was maybe predicting something that we were sure was going to happen some time or other but we weren't sure when it was going to happen and that's a phenomenon called peak oil. peak oil is the highest of production that you can achieve for a country, it occurs in a country, it occurs in a region, it occurs in the world that peak for us occurred in 1970.

and today in spite of all that we have done and the most creative, innovative society in the world, the united states today we produce half the oil that we did in 1970, and we drove more oil wells in our country than all the rest of the world put together. here we see that the two entities which do a really good job of tracking the production and consumption, which are the same we don't have any big stores of oil so the consumption is the same thing as production of oil, and they were -- looked like they plateaued. they had been going up and up and up every time we needed more oil, we could produce more oil, but we ran out of our ability to do that. as the production stagnated and the demand kept going up, look what happened to the price. it spiked in the price. it went up to $147 a barrel. we weren't sure then that this might not have been just a

little ripple in the upswing of production of oil, but we now know that it wasn't. that the caption up there is right. peak oil, are we there yet? apparently so as you'll see subsequently. this is an interesting chart and a very new one. this is produced by deutsch bank and their economist there. looking now not at the production of oil but the rate of increase, and the little left-hand bar here i think is quite optimistic. i hope that that happens. i doubt that that will happen as we will see in a few moments. but they are looking at an increase in production of about $5 billion barrels a day. the oil has been stuck at 85 million barrels of oil a day and this looks at increasing that production by -- this is

capacity. this is capacity. at any price, this is how much more you could produce no matter what the price was. obviously you can produce more oil if it's $200 a barrel because you can develop fields that you can't develop at $100 a barrel. and they'll produce more oil if people are willing to pay $7 a gallon for their gas rather than $3.80 for their gas. so this is their optimistic projection of what capacity increase could be. and this is a reality of what demand will be. and this is the increase in demand. not total demand because we still are the biggest consumers of energy in the world, but our demand rate is not going up. it's fallen off a bit. we used to import 21 million barrels of oil a day. that's a fourth. now we are importing about $18.5 million barrels a day. that's nice that we became more efficient because the chinese and their economic growth needed more oil and the fact they were using less made more available

to them because they are increasing about 6% a year. in their use of oil. what this shows is that there is a 20% deficit here. this is capacity at any price. if we went full board, just producing everywhere we were producing, their prognostication is that by 2015 we are going to have a 20% shortfall in supply, even if we maximize capacity by having very high prices for oil. now, the next chart we'll show you i think why this is maybe an optimistic assumption of what will happen. let me show you this chart. there are two, there are two charts here and the first one of these, top one, appeared in 2008. the bottom one appeared in 2010. this is the international energy

agency, it's a world energy outlook. this is the -- a creature of the oecd in europe. we have a kindred organization, the e.i.a., energy information administration, which is a part of our department of energy, and i don't have them with me but they have very similar charts that are saying essentially the same thing. the top chart they had on their website in 2008 let's take a look at that it's a very interesting chart, this bottom darning blue here, the chart was very long and went way over to the far wall over there back 100 years ago and we started using oil, it would have started at zero. every time we needed more oil we could pump more oil. so it just kept rising and rising and rising. now here we are at a total liquid fuels of 84 million barrels a day. not all of that is usable in your gas tank.

the top one here is natural gas liquids that will increase we found a lot more natural gas. the price has dropped now to about $3. the green one here, which is small now and projected to grow and that will grow, that's unconventional oil that's oil that you get from things like the tar sands in alberta canada, but as you notice here they are predicting a fairly precipitous dropoff in production from the fields that we are now pumping. this is crude oil currently producing fields. up until now every time we needed more oil from those fields, all we had to do was to suck a little harder in the wells and the oil came up. what they are predicting here is that won't be true for the future. that the world is now going to experience the situation the united states has been in since 1970 that is no matter what you do, production of oil will drop off. from the fields that you are now

pumping. the dark red here is enhanced oil recovery that really should be a part of the bottom one here because it's just squeezing a little bit more oil out of the fields you are presently pumping. by putting live steam down there or co-2 down there or seawater. saudi arabia uses a lot of seawater to force their oil out. it's easily separated after you got it to the surface. now, they are predicting by 2030 on this chart that we'll be producing 106 million barrels of oil a day up from the 84 million barrels of oil we are producing today. and in order to do that with the production dropping off in the fields that we are pumping now, we are going to have to get oil somewhere else. and there are two somewhere elses that they are talking about. one of those is this light blue, that's developing fields we have now discovered which are too difficult and expensive to develop, even with oil at $100 a barrel.

like a big find in the gulf of mexico that was under 7,000 feet of water and 30,000 feet of rock. but at some price, and i heard $11 a barrel, that sounds -- $111 a barrel, that sounds precise. they could then begin developing that field. then the red here, the bright red, is fields yet to be discovered. these are fields we haven't discovered but will. they are projecting we'll be able to develop those fields. we have these two big wedges in here that will keep the production of oil going up from the 84 million barrels a now for liquid fuels to 1806 million barrels a day in 2030. two years later the same organization did another prognostication and that's the one on the bottom here. and this time they go out to 2035 instead of 2030. they go out five years further. and now they have reduced their expectations from 106 million barrels of oil a day to just 96 million barrels of oil a day.

as they look at the prospects out there, they are persuaded that we are not going to be able to reach that 106 million barrels a day so now they are prognosticating five years later only 96 million barrels a day. the top two curves are the same thing. they have flipped them and changed the colors. the to the one here is unconventional oil anti-second is natural gas liquids. and notice here that even taking the enhanced oil recovery and putting that little wedge down here with the production from the fields currently production, they have a really precipitous falloff. they are looking at those two years later. wow, they are really decreasing in production faster than we thought they were. we are going to have less oil than we thought. so now they have two huge wedges. if you look at this line, this heavy dark line here that's the liquid duels that can go in your gas tank and that's barely

moving up, isn't it. just about flat there. and they keep it flat by having these two wedges that are really really large. by 2035, 3/4 of all the liquid fuels that we are producing are going to come from fields that were producing nothing from now. i want to go back to the previous chart where they had this prognostication about the growth of five billion barrels a day by 2015. this goes clear out to 35. they are only up to 96. we need to denote that that was capacity no matter what the cost. and that may be true. that may be true. you could get there. but we not like to see oil at $200 a barrel. our economy would not respond. by the way if you go on their website you may have difficulty finding the lower chart. some have told me it's not there at all. you won't find the upper chart. it's embarrassing to have the

two charts side by side showing how much your predictions changed in just two years from 2008 to 2010. the next chart kind of puts this in perspective of the world. and this is a very interesting chart. it's one pictures are worth 1,000 words, this does it. this is the world according to oil. . and this is what it would look like in terms of what the oil would look like what the world would look like. you see that saudi arabia is dominating the world. they have 2% of all the reserves in the world. we are not really sure that's what they have. that's what they tell us they have but they won't open their books. none of these opecss -- you see they have the lion's share,

they won't open their books. we don't know how much they have but they are pumping large amounts of oil. that's what they say they have and that's what the chart depicts. i want to take a moment to commend our military. they're taking some flack recently for what they're doing. i think they're doing exactly the right thing for several different reasons. they're moving as quickly as they can from fossil fuels from oil to alternatives, and they're doing that for a couple of very good reasons. you can use the -- create the alternatives nearer to where you are using them, you will avoid a huge cost in both treasure and lives because a significant number of the people killed in these wars are killed in the convoys that are bringing fuels. understand that the weight of the fuel brings about 70% of everything they hold to the war front is fuel. reminds me a little, i

understand, in the canal boats on the canal that about 70% of what they carried was food for the mules and so it hasn't changed a lot, has it? we still -- this energy source is about 70% of all the weight that we carry. so i want to take just a moment to commend our military for doing exactly the right thing. they are really forward looking. for the moment, you know, you may pay a little more for the alternative, but you know, since the liquid fuels from conventional sources just aren't going to be there in the future without something happening that almost nobody who is knowledgeable in this field thinks will happen, they're doing exactly the right thing and i want to commend them for what they are doing. they are recognizing that the world will inevitably, inevitably transition from fossil fuels to renewables. first person that articulated that anybody would seem to understand that since the moon isn't made of green cheese and

the earth isn't made of oils that fossil fuels aren't finite and one day it will be done, but the one person who really recognized that, a prominent person who was rickover. the age of oil would be but a blip. he had no idea how long it will last. the longer it will last, the timely we'll have to find a more better energy. i want to commend the military for their foresight and their tenacity for pursuing these programs. i want to spend a couple moments with this chart because it is so meaningful. here we are, the united states. we are this yellow color because we use a lot of oil per capita and we're that size because that's all the oil we have. rerepresent reserves of about

2% of the re-- we represent reserves of about 2% of the reserves in the world. we import about 2/3 what we use. our number one importer, by the way, is canada. and they have less oil than we but they don't have very many people so they can export. and the number two importer was mexico, but now they have fallen to number three and saudi arabia now number two importer. very interesting experience in mexico. a fisherman by the name of cantrell bringing his nets into the national oil company, your spilled oil messed up my fishing net, you need to bring me a new one. they would give him a new net. they said, gee, we didn't think we spilled that much oil. they said, where are you

finding this? he said, come on, let me show you. it was bubbling up. second to the grand daddy of all fields that's been pumping for half a century in saudi arabia and i think it pumps something like five million barrels a year and that's how much we pump and that's from sangle field in saudi arabia. the european union europe, is a bit bigger than we are in terms of economy. let's see if we can find them on the map. well, there's norway. looks pretty big compared to some of the other countries and here they are with essentially no oil production. totally dependent on liquid fuels from this part of the world. but even more alarming is looking over there at india and china. 1,300,000,000,000 in india. here is india. here is china.

wow. collectively they have about as much time as -- less than the united states. we have a big chunk of our oil coming from alaska up here. recognizing this reality, the chinese are now buying oil all over the world. not only do they buy oil, they also buy good will. what you need? a hospital roads, soccer stadium? and i ask the state department, you know, we have only 2% of the oil in the world and we are using 25% of the oil. how come we aren't buying oil all over the world? you don't really need to own the oil. it really makes very little difference who owns the oil because the person who comes with the money and it's dollars now, let's hope it stays dollars orwell' have a big problem, they go to the global oil auction and they buy oil at the going price. today it was $103 a barrel. we are not buying any oil. we don't think china understands the marketplace.

well, that time i think china was growing at 16% or 18%. i think some at least presumptive indication that a country that's going at 16% to 18% kind of understands the marketplace. so why would china be buying oil? let me suggest something. i hope i'm wrong. china has 900 million people that through the -- in rural areas, that through the miracle of communications knows the benefits of an industrialized society and they're saying hey, guys, what about us? because they are not sharing of the benefits of an industrialized society. if china can't bring some modicum of the benefits that accrued through a citizen in an industrialized society they see perhaps their empire unraveling much as the soviet empire unravelled so they are making sure they have adequate resources for these 900 million people and the other 600

million people in urban areas. at the same time that china is buying up oil all over the world, they're very aggressively building a blue water navy, a brown water navy, what they're concerned about, is protecting their coastal areas and by the way, it's cheaper and more quickly developed. but they're very aggressively building a blue water navy and access the technology that will keep us away if they wish to. i hope the time doesn't come when the chinese say, gee, i'm sorry but it's our oil and it is -- will be their oil. they bought it and we can't share it because right now it doesn't matter who has the oil. it's shared in the global oil auction. well, so, this map indicates that the futures fraught with some possibilities of some pretty meaningful geopolitical tensions and, again, i want to commend our military for their

foresight, recognizing this reality and the reality that oil is $103 a barrel. and by the way, when oil goes up a dollar a barrel it makes a big dent in what they can do. they can provide less health care. they can help less people. have less r&d. buy less of platforms when oil goes up because energy is a huge part of the cost of the military. so, again, applaud to the military for what -- for their foresight and what they're doing. this is a chart that was predicted in 1956. here we were in 1956 in the united states. at that time we were the king of oil. we were pumping more oil. we were using more oil. we were exporting more oil than anybody else in the world, and texas had a big chunk of that oil you see down here in the rest of the united states here. on the sixth day of march

1956, an oil geologist by the name of m. king hundred art, and i have his -- hub art and i have -- m. king hubbert, and i have his prediction here. biggest consumer and biggest exporter and he's saying in 14 years, by about 1970, we're going to reach our maximum oil production and no matter what we do after that oil production is going to go down. how could he predict that? well, what he had done was to note the production and exhaustion of individual oil fields. by 1956 we had enough of those that he could see there was a bell curve kind of up and down as you were developing exploiting and pumping those fields out. so he said, gee, if i could add up all the little oil fields that we have in our country then i will get one big bell curve and i could predict when it's going to peak. he said it's going to peak about 1970. and sure enough right on target

it peaked about 1970. now, we shortly found a huge amount of oil in alaska. oh by the way the top one is natural gas, liquids. and we're just learning how to use those and so they were a meaningful part of our energy availability. there was a little blip in the slide down the other side of hubbert's peak with the enormous supply of oil from alaska. i don't know exactly what it is today. but the fourth of the oil production in our country came from alaska. and then the discoveries in the gulf of mexico and we see them down here and they hardly made a ripple in the slide down the other side of what's called hubbert's peak. now, here's a curve chart, this is a kind of chart that the statistician would use and here we are, 1970 and hubbert said we are going to be sliding down the other side and hubbert's peak are the little triangles with yellow in them. the actual lower 48 production is the green, and the total production adding in alaska and

the gulf of mexico is the red. of course, he didn't include alaska and the gulf of mexico. it was only the lower 48, and some might argue, a statistician might argue those two curves are different. m. king hubbert got it right. the next chart is a very good prediction of where we are and the challenge which is recognized by our military. this is where we get our energy from today. and this is 2004. it hasn't changed a whole lot since 2004 but coal this much. natural gas is going up a little now. that's getting bigger because it's now really cheap and it's pushing some coal out. and some people are afraid of nuclear. may squeeze a bit of that out here. petroleum, about 40% of all of our energy. and here are renewables. here are renewables. now, as hyman rickover predicted one day these two things nuclear is going to

fill this whole circle. it's not tomorrow by the way and we are not running out of oil. we are not running out of oil. we have more oil to pump than all the oil that's been pumped in all the history of the world. what we are running out of is our ability to pump this oil as fast as we'd like to use it. here is a growth breakdown of renewables. solar. wow. look how small it is there. wind. wind is growing now and these two things might be a bit bigger if we update this chart. the important thing to note here and hydroelectric, that's been there for a while. biomass, and that's primarily burning waste and paper mills and things like that. much of that is not new technology. geothermal, that's true geothermal tapping into the molten earth, that could be bigger. whenever we can do that, that's an essentially exhaustible source of energy. this shows us the challenge that we face. we really are up to this challenge, and the part of it, this is green and now people who are green focus say gee,

we need to be doing more. this for a couple of reasons. some because they are the carbon footprint and others, gee, fossil fuels just aren't going to be there. no matter what your premise is, the solution is exactly the same thing. so rather than criticizing each other's premise i hope we would lock arms and march forward and go to more renewables. here's the last chart, because our time is about up today, and five years ago i led a could he del to china. nine of -- codel to china. nine of us went there and we went there to talk about energy. we all were stunned because china began their discussion of energy by talking about postoil. wow. of course there will be a postoil world. hyman rickover predicted it. almost anybody -- gee, everything is not oil out there. one day it will come to an end. china is looking, this is not tomorrow. this is probably 100, 150 years from now. so this is long-term policy.

everybody we talked to, not just the energy people, everybody we talked to talked about this postoil strategy and here are the five points. here are the five points. number one, conservation. the cheapest oil you get is the oil you don't use. number two, domestic sources of energy and diversify those sources as much as you can. number four will surprise you. number four says be kind to the environment. they know they aren't but they have these 900 billion people who are requiring the benefits of an industrialized society so they're choking on coal-firepower plant that they build one each week. they are building hundreds of nuclear power plants and i'm sure they'll retire the coal fire plants. i'll close with this and yield back my time. they're pleading with international cooperation. you think about it for just a moment. we have a real problem here. if the united states really gets serious about conservation and efficiency and saving energy, and we better, and some

will argue, wow, that will just empower the chinese more because then they're going to use that energy that we make more available and cheaper and they're going to compete with us economically and that's not a good thing. . from a selfish perspective, unless everybody does it nobody's going to do it. which is why the chinese are pleading for international cooperation because they know it's not going to have a -- as happy an ending if we don't have international cooperation. while they plead for international cooperation they are planning -- they have plan b. what if it doesn't happen? and we buy up oil in the world and then we have a navy big enough to make sure we have access to that oil in the world. we are the most innovative, creative society in the history of the world. i can see america once again exporting country, and it should be green technology. much of what we are now

importing from china and other places in the world we created here. and it migrated over there for production. that's why every 15 hours we have another billion dollar increase in the trade deficit. i want that thing reversed. i think we can reverse that by recognizing that we have a huge challenge. following the lead of our military and going to renewables as efficiently and quickly as we can. thank you. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the chair lays before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states. one of the fundamental tenets of the american economy has been that if you work hard you can do well enough to raise a family, own a home, send your kids to college, and put a little money away for retirement. that's the promise of america. the defining issue of our time is how to keep that promise alive. we can either settle for a country where shrinking number of people do very well while a

growing number of americans barely get by, or we can restore an economy where everyone gets a fair shot, everyone does their fair share, and everyone plays by the same set of rules. long before the recession that began in december of 2007 job growth was insufficient for a growing population. manufacturing jobs were leaving our shores. technology made businesses more efficient but also made some jobs obsolete. the few at the top saw their incomes rise like never before but most hardworking americans struggled with cost that is were growing, paychecks that were not, and personal debt that kept piling up. in 2008, the house of cards collapsed. we learned that mortgages had been sold to people who could not afford them or did not understand them. they had made bets and dold out big bonus was other people's money. regulators had looked the other way or did not have the authority to stop that behavior. it was wrong.

it was irresponsible. and it plunged our economy into a crisis that put millions out of work, sattled us with more debt, and left innocent hardworking americans holding the bag. in the year before i took office, we lost nearly five million private sector jobs. and we lost almost another four million before our policies were in full effect. those are the facts. but so are these. in the last 23 months businesses have created 3.7 million jobs. last year they created the most jobs since 2005. american manufacturers are hiring again, creating jobs for the first time since the late 1900's and we have put in new place new -- put in place new rules to hold wall street accountable so a crisis like this never happens again. some however, still advocate that going back to the same economic policies that stacked the deck against middle class americans for way too much years and their philosophy is simple, we are better off when everybody

is left to fend for themselves and play by their own rules. that philosophy is wrong. the more americans who succeed, the more america succeeds. but these are not democratic values or republican values. they are american values. and we have to reclaim them. this is a make or break moment for the middle class and for all those who are working to get into the middle class. it is a moment when we can go back to the waste of the -- ways of the past, to growing deficit stagnant incomes and job growth, declining opportunity, and rising inequality, or we can make a break from the past. we can build an economy by restoring our greatest strength, american manufacturing, american energy, skills for american workers, and a renewal of american values and economy built to last. when it comes to the deficit, we have already agreed to more than $2 trillion in cuts and savings. but we need to do more and that means making choices. right now we are poigsed to

spend nearly $-- poised to spend nearly $1 trillion more on what was supposed to be a tell pore rare tax break for 2% of americans. a quarter of all millionaires pay lower tax rates than millions of middle class households. i believe that tax reform should follow the buffet rule. if you make more than $1 million a year, you should not pay less than 30% in taxes. in fact, if you are earning $1 million a year, you should not get special tax subsidies or deductions. on the other hand, if you make under $250,000 a year, like 98% of american families do, your taxes should not go up. americans know that this generation's success is only possible because past generations felt a responsibility to each other and to the future of their contry. now it is our turn, now it falls to us to live up to that same sense of shared responsibility. this year's economic report of

the president prepared by the council of economic advisors describes the emergency rescue measures taken to end the recession and support the ongoing recovery and lays out a blue print for an economy built to last. it explains how we are restoring our strength as a nation. our innovative economy, our strong manufacturing base, and our workers by investing in the technologies of the future in companies that create jobs here in america and in education and training programs that will prepare our workers for the jobs of tomorrow. we must ensure that these investments benefit everyone and increase opportunity for all americans or we risk threatening one of the features that defines us as a nation. that america is a country in which anyone can do well regardless of how they start out. no one built this country on their own. this nation is great because we built it together. if we remember that truth today join together in common purpose, and maintain our common resolve,

then i am as confident as ever that our economic future is hopeful and strong. signed barack obama, the white house. february, 2012. the speaker pro tempore: it is referred to the joint economic committee and ordered printed. under the speaker's announced policy of january 5, 2011, the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. woodall, for 30 minutes. mr. woodall: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate your being here with me on a friday afternoon. and for your providing the time. i couldn't have asked for anything better than to have the president's economic message read right before i came down here to the floor because i have exactly that same thing on my mind. and what is shocking to me, and you remember, mr. speaker, it

was less than a month ago the entire u.s. house of representatives was sitting here in this chamber, the entire united states senate sitting here in this chamber supreme court, the joint chiefs of staff, and the president standing right here not five feet from where i'm standing. not five feet in front of you, mr. speaker, giving his state of the union speech. what struck me about that speech is that i could have given almost word for word the exact same one. mr. speaker, when we talk about the rhetoric in this country, the rhetoric's the same. very little divides republicans and democrats. the president said in the economic address that the clerk just read, we need to make choices. we need to make choices billion who we are and what we are going to do. i happen to have behind me, mr. speaker, the president's budget. i left the plastic on this one. i have another one i poured through.

for folks who are back in the offices, mr. speaker, i would recommend instead of cutting through the plastic to go ahead and go to www.omb.gov. that's the president's office of management and budget. the entire federal budget that he has proposed is there on the webpage for all americans to see. and it's not a small project to put together the united states budget. and i applaud the president for taking that step. of course the united states senate mr. speaker, 200 yards from where we stand right now, hasn't produced a budget in over 1,000 days. in fact the majority leader over there, harry reid, said just last week he's not going to do it again this year. we have time mr. speaker. we have a common set of numbers on which we can base it. he said i'm not going to do it. it's not necessary. a reporter said but it's the law. he said it's not important. i'm not going to do it. reporter said your democratic budget committee chairman said he's going to mark up a budget. and the budget committee and senate majority leader said he can do what they want in the

budget committee but i'm not bringing a budget to the senate floor. mr. speaker i have in my breast pocket here the rule book by which the united states of america is supposed to run. the united states constitution. this document by which all of our decisions are good. one of the only things this document asks us to do here in the u.s. house of representatives is pass a budget each and every year. budget act 1974, asked that same thing of the house and of the senate. propose that budget and the president has done that. to his credit he's proposed a budget, but he said in his message that was read moments ago we have to make choices. and what you will find, mr. speaker, if you go through this budget, i know families are across this country, folks curious about what the president is proposing, you will find a budget devoid of tough choices. hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages in my hand mr. speaker, devoid of tough

choices. the president said in his economic address that you read moments ago, the clerk read moments ago, mr. speaker, this is a make or break moment for the middle class. nonsense. nonsense. this is a make or break moment for america. this is a make or break moment for this experiment that we call our republic. this is a make or break moment for all of the values that we share as an independent people. this is not a make or break moment for the middle class. this is a make or break moment for every single person who calls america home. and if we are going to preserve our republic, mr. speaker if we are going to protect the opportunity society for which america has become known, we have to make tough choices. mr. speaker, have you thought about it? because it's plagued me since i was sworn in last january. i have only been here as a

member of congress a little over a year. what about the old mantra, send me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses longing to be free? what about that, mr. speaker? your tired, your poor, your huddled masses longing to be free. why aren't the doors of america flung open to every freedom loving person on this planet? and i know the answer. because in the days of america when that was the mantra of the land, this was an opportunity society. you came and you succeeded by the power of your ideas and the sweat of your brow. some folks succeeded and some folks failed. failure is a part of all of our lives. if you are not experiencing failure, you are not trying hard enough. if you are pushing yourself to extreatments you'll find you'll come up short. but, mr. speaker while a safety

net is important to america, a safety sponge that sucks you down into it and prevents you from ever escaping and being free is not the principle on which this country was founded. and day after day after day we let our country go further in that direction. let's talk about the economic record that was just discussed in the president's economic address, mr. speaker. this is what the president said almost two years ago today. february of 2010 he said this. jobs will be our number one focus in 2010 and we are going to start where new jobs do, with small businesses. he's absolutely right. more than half of all jobs that get created in this country get created by small business. and that's where the entrepreneurship is. that's where the hiring excitement is. that's where the new ideas come from. we love our home depots, deltas, we love our u.p.s.'s and wall marts, but that's not where the

job growth comes from. the president's absolutely right. job growth comes from our small businesses. and two years ago lism to the day, mr. speaker, the president knew it. the president knew that if we are going to get this economy back on track, we have to start with the folks who hire. we have to start with the folks who are able to put americans back to work, our smull businesses. mr. speaker, this is a chart that came from the service services administration, one of the administration that the president oversees. you can't see it mr. speaker, but this chart goes from 1995 to 2011, and what it shows is the number of published final rules that cost american businesses more than $100 million a year. that's what it takes in this country, mr. speaker. before we consider a rule, a really powerful rule, before we

consider a rule really detrimental to this country, it has to cost $100 million. i tell you the cost of $1 million is important, $10 million is important but our measuring stake is $100 million. this is what we see. on average about 80 such rules a year -- now, i'm small government conservative from the great state of georgia, mr. speaker. i tell you 80 major rules a year mr. speaker are zapping freedom from individuals communities, states and that's too many but that's kind of what we have as an average over the past 15 years. but look at what happens mr. speaker, the day that nancy pelosi gets sworn in as speaker of the house the day president obama gets sworn in as president of the united states the number of major rules costing the american economy more than $100 million a year sky rockets, sky rockets. and by sky rockets mr.

speaker, i mean doubles from the level that president clinton was imposing. understand that. this isn't a republican or democrat issue. this is an individual philosophy issue, the individual that's in the white house matters, the individual that's in the speaker's chair matters, those individual philosophies translates into policies. we had a republican congress, a democratic president and we continued on about historical average in terms of rules and legislation. when we elected nancy pelosi as speaker of the house and we elected president obama to the white house, we see the number of major regulations skyrocket. and who do you think pays for that mr. speaker? we do as the american consumer. everybody in america pays for that when they go to buy goods at the shelf. they may pay for that when their job leaves america and travels overseas. they may pay for that when the -- they used to be able to buy. no longer manufactured because the new rule or regulation has

put that business out of business. my mom said that about 100-watt light bulbs. i am one of the hoarders. we need those 100 watt light bulbs. went to the store. couldn't find them. couldn't find them. put out of business by a regulatory, regulatory burden. the president knows he needs to start with small businesses to create jobs. that's what he says, but what he does is preside over the most onerous regulatory burden increase that our nation has seen in decades. this chart's particularly troubling to me, mr. speaker. it's a measurement of the ease of starting a business. the united states used to be fourth. today we're 13th. folks looking around the country. where can entrepreneurs succeed? where can new ideas succeed?

where can economies grow, be changed, be vibrant? the u.s. has fallen from four to 13. let me tell you who's in front of us now on the world stage, mr. speaker. macedonia, georgia, the country, not my home state, rwanda belarus, saudi arabia, armenia. these are the countries based on a static list of economic models of rules and regulations and opportunity on economic success, places it is easier to succeed in today than in america. that's outrageous, mr. speaker. the president knows. if we're going to create jobs in this country you got to start where most jobs do, that's with small businesses. that's what he says but what he does is preside over a decline of opportunity in this country

that puts us now below macedonia, saudi arabia, rwanda and belarus on the world economic stage. mr. speaker, from the department of labor, we see entrepreneurship in america has reached a 17-year low. entrepreneurship in america is at a 16-year low. business startups are at the lowest level since data was first collected in 1994. business startups at the lowest level since the data began to be collected at the department of labor in 1994. mr. speaker, this isn't a chart about business success. we all know that business is

hard. you probably are more failures than successes. it's hard to grow a business. this isn't about businesses succeeding. this is about americans who are willing to try. the number of americans willing to try has fallen to a 17-year low, and i ask you mr. speaker, is this a measurement that americans have changed or is this a measurement that the business climate in america has changed? we are the same proud, independent, hardworking family-loving people that we have always been when these numbers were started in 1994. we are those same people as a country, mr. speaker. but the environment in which we live the economic marketplace in which we operate, that's changed.

that's changed, mr. speaker. 1994, you see the regulatory burden on small businesses. as we now move to a 17-year low in economic activity mr. speaker, you see our regulatory burdens are at historic high. that's not a coincidence. that's cause tif. -- causative. mr. speaker, faced with these challenges, the president has presented his budget, and i'll say it again. i said it when i opened but i'll say it again. i appreciate the president taking on that leadership role. it is a role that the law requires that he take on and so he takes it on. that would distinguish him from the united states senate where the law also requires they take it on but they ignore that responsibility year after year after year after year. and the reason they do, mr.

speaker, i don't mind sharing this with folks. folks know it back in their offices watching mr. speaker. they know why. because a budget is a moral document. we can't publish hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of pages without telling the american people how you feel about the challenges facing our nation. as i said in the beginning, this document tells me the president feels powerless to confront any of the challenges facing our nation because not a single tough decision is made in this entire budget. but at least he put that out there for the american people to see. not so with our colleagues on the senate side. this is what happened in the president's budget mr. speaker. he claims $4 trillion worth of deficit reduction and, again, i want to give him credit for that. there used to be a time where folks would send budgets to capitol hill and brag about how

much more money they were spending each year. when the president wants to sell this budget to capitol hill, he's bragging about how much less he's spending than previous budgets. he says he's reduced the federal budget by $4 trillion over the 10-year window. kudos. kudos. except that's not exactly how the numbers shake out. mr. speaker, of the $4 trillion that he claims credit for $2 trillion has already been passed into law. you'll remember this new freshman class that you and i are part of, mr. speaker. we came in here, we passed a 2011 appropriations bill. we passed the 2012 appropriations bill. we passed the budget control act. we implemented $2 trillion worth of changes to the federal budget. $2 trillion over a 10-year window moving us back towards black and away from red. the president claims credit for those $2 trillion that are already signed into law, that

are already being implemented, that are already the practice under which the federal government operates, claims credit for those in this new budget. i understand why he wants to, mr. speaker, but i don't think that's being honest with the american people. i think we owe the american people more transparency than that. let me say, $2 trillion already the law of the land. down here, mr. speaker, we see another $850 billion in savings that he claims. i've labeled it the war gimmick and i know gimmicks are a violating word. i might have been a bad word when i labeled it that way but i think it's accurate. $850 billion mr. speaker, the president says in his budget he's saving the american people. why? because wars that were never going to happen, dollars that had never been requested, troops that had never been deployed are in fact not going to be deployed. hear that. this is $850 billion over the

10-year window, war savings, he claims, money that was never asked for, never appropriated, never going to be appropriated and would have had to be borrowed had we needed it. it's not saved money mr. speaker. it's fictional money that was never out there and the president claims credit for. why? because he needs it to get to his $4 trillion figure. down here we have debt service gimmicks, mr. speaker, money that we would have borrowed but we are not going to borrow because of changes made in the budget. again, just to be clear, so far we looked at $2 trillion already enacted. $850 billion never requested. we're now claiming debt savings, savings the president's saying the american people are not going to have to pay on debt service on all of these pots of money that we were never going to have to pay debt service on, mr. speaker,

because they were never the law of the land. these dollars were never going out. we never passed legislation to send this $850 billion out the door. yet, we have another $300 billion in debt savings. again is it good news for the american people that we're not going pay that $300 billion in extra interest? that's good news. don't let me be the one to tell you it's not good news. it's good news because of the house has already done, because of the laws we already passed, because of decisions we already made. not one penny of that comes from any new decision made in these hundreds upon hundreds upon hundreds of pages mr. speaker. not one penny. this chart mr. speaker, lays it out. i had to blow up the tip there. you might be able to see just a

little bit of green here. this dotted white line mr. speaker, is the debt of america, the debt, the borrowing that we have all done from our children and our grandchildren. you and i were not here in this house when that happened, mr. speaker, but we are responsible for it just like every other american family is responsible for it. we have to pay it back just like every other american has to pay it back. $16 trillion today headed over the 10-year budget window that the president has proposed towards $26 trillion. now, mr. speaker what i have here sidotted white line which shows what current law. current law. i have a red bar, a red grar of that shows you what the -- graph that shows you what the president is proposing. the president is proposing that our debt increase in 2013,

increase in 2014, increase in 2015 and 2016 and 2017, 2018, 2019 2020, 2021. and then mr. speaker, you can't see it, way out here, i've blown it up so the folks can see it in their office, you see a little bit of green because those tough decisions those tough decisions made in these hundreds upon hundreds and hundreds of pages about how to solve the american debt burden happen, just this much, happened in the year 2021. 2021 mr. speaker, is when this budget for the first time begins to save the american people some bit of debt burden over current law. we c