office if they do not listen to the people? , republicans are going to get cleaned out. host: let's talk about the polls on gun control legislation. guest: their unequivocal on the back run checks on the top line. when you look below, you find out that half of people think that that may be a step toward a universal gun registry. so they think, yeah, we could do this, but they also think it is problematic. that is what you see republican lawmakers being very concerned about what this will eventually look like and who it will impact. but there is a strong push for this. artisansplits along lines. republicans feel much less compelled to work on these things because republican approval, for example an assault theons ban or a limit on size of ammunition magazines, is not there. it is just not there for those folks to make that leap. but will be a challenge,

it will be a challenge for the democratic lawmakers that are trying to bring that into existence. at the time blind -- at the top line, it is quite compelling. ast: david grant is correspondent for the christian science monitor. thank you for being here. guest: thank you for having me. host: now, live coverage of the house. able reid j. ribble to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the order of the house of january 3, 2013, the chair will now recognize members from lists submitted by the majority and minority leaders for morning hour ebate.

the chair will alternate recognition between the parties with each party limited to one hour and each member other than the majority and minority leaders and the minority whip each, to five minutes but in no event shall debate continue beyond 11:50 a.m. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee, for five minutes. i ask son lee: unanimous consent to address the house for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker, most of us came here to this place to serve the american people and to ensure that the most powerful lawmaking body answer the needs of the cries of those who cannot speak for themselves.

nd yet as we lange wish -- languish in those values, they may be more on paper than they are in action. i rise today to ask, maybe even plead, that this house puts on the floor h.r. 900, which is to eliminate the sequester from the budget reconciliation act and to go to regular order, because the people of the united states are hurting. and even more so, i would say that they are crying. oh, it's very easy for us to be able to say there is no impact, we see no impact. i hope for those who have been in their districts for the last two weeks that they realize how inaccurate and untrue that is. in fact, it hurts me to see the pain in my constituents' faces and homes because of sequester.

enforce or cheme to have congress to act and it did not work. some say whose fault it was, whose idea it was, we really don't care because right now there are people who have lost head start seats, whose parents have been told their children cannot come back to school any more. grown men crying -- grown men crying because their little one cannot go back to a head start class and they have nowhere else for them to go. the w.i.c. program that is so desperately needed by women, infants and children, cut to the bone. this is a scheme that is long overdufort us to get rid of -- overdue for us to get rid of. a food business was shut down of district, the thought

it is horrible. many of their products in our local grocery stores, if we didn't have food inspectors from the f.d.a., they're being slashed and eliminated, this product would still be on the market. $85 billion in cuts is too nondescript. the federal emergency management under homeland security, $1 billion being cut, which means those who are still suffering from superstorm sandy, many of whom are homeless, 40,000 are still in hotel rooms in new york, they won't be able to be helped. the department of transportation, $1.943 billion, and that means the new start mobility, people waiting in line for light -- line for light rail, jobs cut immediately. i spoke this weekend to f.a.a. members, air traffic controllers. don't think it's not being felt, and it will be felt more and more in the summer increase of travel because $637 million n losses and $487 million,

$almost -- almost $500 million cut. cuts from customs and border control over the international ports of entry. we are talking about comprehensive immigration reform and border security, there's your border security, cutting the very personnel that are ensuring the security of america. that's wrong-headed and it's time to stop now. but it really pains my heart, if you will, to see the cuts to shows innocent families, those children in head start, to see the cuts to workers who have done nothing other than to come to work every morning, the federal workers, and the impacts of contractors to the department of defense, work that is forward thinking in dealing with technology, cut to the bone, slashing employees. we will see the surge of the economy going down. it's not the fault of the administration. this is the inaction of us in

the united states congress, and i think it is immediately necessary for speaker boehner to put on the floor of the house for full debate h.r. 900. eliminate the sequester, simple sentence, and go to regular order, beginning the process of the budget. whether you like this budget or that budget, begin the appropriate process of appropriations for if you don't think we're going to have one of the darkest seasons forthcoming, you wait and see what $85 billion in reckless cuts, it's a trickle down effect. you cannot recoup. jobs will not come back, and we were moving up, creating jobs. everybody wants to point the finger as to whose fault it is. i believe it is something where we have to come together. i want to finish on the note that medical research funded by the national institutes is also being cut, and we were number one in medical research. the time is now. get rid of the sequester and

help the american people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. poe, for five minutes. mr. poe: mr. speaker, let's say i take one of my 10 grandkids, barrack houston, to a basketball game he's playing in, he gets hit in the face with a basketball so we go to the doctor to see if his nose is broken. the doctor asks him this question, is this the first time you've been hit in the face with a basketball, the second time or do you have a habit of being hit in the face with a basketball? barret says, i don't know. doctor says, i got to know because, you see, i got this code book here and the law requires that i make sure i put in the code book the way you were hurt by the basketball in which time because there are five codes for being hit in the face by a basketball. and let's say he doesn't know. well, the doctor has to be accurate in how he diagnosises being hit in the face by the

basketball or the doctor's in trouble. let's say i take another one of my grandsons, jackson, we go hunting but he happens to get assaulted by a wild turkey. we go to the doctor and the doctor says, hey, i got to know exactly how you were hurt by that doctor because -- by that turkey, because there is a code for being assaulted by a turkey for the first time, there is a code for being assaulted by a turkey a second time. there are nine codes. the doctor must get the right code or he's in violation of the law about being assaulted by the turkey. seems nine codes for a turkey assault is a bit silly. right now, mr. speaker, there are 18,000 of these codes doctors must be accurate when they fill out the diagnosis of a patient who comes and sees them. stay with me, mr. speaker. 140,000 of ill be

these medical codes that doctors must get right or they're in trouble by the federal government. the new code system is called icd-10. for example, you're injured in a chicken coup, that's code number y-972. you're injured at an art gallery, you fall down, that's y-92250. there are even three new codes for being injured when you walk into a lamppost. you walk into a lamppost for the first time, that's one code. you walk into a lamppost for the second time, oh, that's a different code. you walk into a lamppost habitually, yet, that is even a different code and the doctor must get it right because he's in violation of federal regulators if he doesn't get it right. the doctors i talked to say this is an expensive distraction from treating patients. well, no kidding. it's red tape, it's bureaucracy, and this is what

happens when clueless big government here in washington starts telling people out in the workplace, doctors and patients, what they must do and when government intrudes into our lives with more regulation. government continues to make things more complicated. doctors, you know, they're really into business of helping the sick and the injured and saving lives. do they really have the time, the money to translate a complicated 140,000-code book when they diagnosis everything that happens? but they don't have a choice. if they miscode they do not get paid. even more so they face the threat of being fined by the federal government. there's more. o set up this new 140,000-code philosophy, the going to cost an average single practitioner doctor $80,000. now, isn't that lovely?

it's a practice of five to 10 people, that's going to cost that practice $250,000 to comply with federal regulations. the new code book. you know, in my opinion, mr. speaker, when regulators go to work every day down the street in one of these big office buildings, they sit around a big oak table, they pull out their lattas and i-pads and they ask each other, who shall we regulate today? and they type out a few regulations, they send it out to the fruited plain and masses, they don't care about the costs or the effect and whether the regulation makes any sense, they just do it anyway and we have to deal with this. these new codes not going to make one sick person well. but yet doctors must comply with these new codes or the code police is going to punish them. doctors want to take care of patients, but the federal government is forcing 140,000

complicated, unreasonable new codes on all of us that are hard to decipher. maybe we should sequester these new codes, and where are those world war ii code breakers when we need them most? and that's just the way it is. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from oregon, mr. lawyer, for five minutes. -- mr. blumenauer, for five minutes. mr. blumenauer: i welcome the president's budget submission, which will mark the first time since 2009 that the house, senate and the president have all submitted budgets. it's an encouraging development, but the larger question is whether congress can actually use the budgeting process to show how we will do business differently. despite the media side shows about artificial sequestration crisis, the major issues we have to address to fix the budget and our current deficit are spending on defense, health care and the tax system itself.

although the administration has started us down a path to manage pentagon spending in the future, we have barely scratched the surface. there are too many unnecessary bases at home and abroad that should be phased down or closed. there's far too much invested in an antiquated nuclear arsenal which we haven't used in 68 years and contains many, many times more weapons than we would ever need for deterrence. the $700 billion scheduled to be spent over the next 10 years must be reduced dramatically. we have yet to come to grips with the long-term costs of an all-volunteer army and the right balance between reserve and regular forces. until these fundamental issues are addressed, the challenges of the future are going to be difficult to face because we spend too much time and energy

and money preparing for the conflicts of the past while we avoid our budget reality. health care expenditures continue to be the greatest overall threat to the budget, but it's not because the united states doesn't spend enough money on health care. . we spend more than anybody else in the world, twice as much as many countries, but even spending far more than anybody else we are still not able to deliver quality health care for most americans. instead of finding health care reform, we should be working together to accelerate that process so we can reward value over volume of health care. if the oregon model of health care we are working on diligently to implement were applied on a national scale, it could save over $1 trillion over the next 10 years.

as much as fought over in the bottle of see questions terrorist. -- sequestration. we must also reform a tax code which is unfair, complex, and costly. over $160 billion just to administer it. i would suggest that he we think about implementing a carbon tax which has the potential of reducing the deficit and tax rates for individuals and business in a fair and comprehensive form. the carbon tax has the added benefit of being the most direct way to reduce the threat to the planet caused by extreme weather events promoted by carbon pollution. it's very encouraging that the president's budget again speaks to infrastructure improvement in investment. but we need to be bolder and more comprehensive in our approach. especially how we deal with

funding, rebuilding and rue new england america. at a time when 17 states have stepped up to increase transportation funding, it's unacceptable that we pay a highway trust fund with a gas tax that hasn't been increased since 1993 and is increasingly collecting less money as fuel efficiency improves. the introduction of the president's budget is an important step forward and will hopefully spark an earnest, thoughtful, focused discussion about how we do business differently. how we pay for the needs of a growing and aging america, and how we can get more value for the investments we are already making while laying the foundation for a more prosperous future. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from north carolina, mr. jones, for five minutes. mr. jones: thank you very much. when i was home like most members during the easter break, i had the opportunity to read in the rally, north carolina, paper

an art -- raleigh, north carolina paper an article that took me back. the title is iran is viktor -- victor in post war iraq. the first paragraph says, 10 years after the united states' land invasion to out of iraqi president -- oust iraqi president,s the common enemy is iran. i think most of us in the house know 25, 30 years ago our nation supported saddam hussein when he was fighting the iranians. this is what frustrates the american people. we create a bad policy, we continue to support a bad policy. it makes no sense. yesterday i had the opportunity to speak to the inspector general on the iraq project and what he shared with me i would like maybe when i get the report to share more information, but just for example approximately

$11.7 billion in waste, fraud, and abuse. what makes this so ironic is that the iranians are possibly becoming the beneficiaries of this money. the taxpayers now are spending money in iraq that could possibly be going into the covers -- coffers of the iranian people. i guess it makes sense to most of my colleagues, it doesn't to me. i encourage the american people o go to costofwar.crft om. -- cost-ofwar.com. you need to see what's happening in afghanistan and iraq. you'll see a combined total of $1ings 4 trillion and -- $1.4 trillion. it's a running total. it just keeps running. there we go again, uncle same can't pay its bills and we'll take care of these foreign countries. makes no sense. a total of 6,656 american troops have died in the iraq and afghanistan wars. not to mention the thousands of

civilian lives lost and the veterans who return home physically and mentally wounded. whether it is in iraq or afghanistan, we cannot continue to spend money that we don't have and neglect the american people. i hope the people of this country and my fellow colleagues share in my outrage and concern because it would be almost a sin if we continue to spend this money without any accountability or very little to speak of. mr. speaker, yesterday i visited a solder from my district in north carolina. he was at walter reed hospital at bethesda. his father called me four months ago and said i really would appreciate you see my son. he's lost a leg. he's lost fingers. he's badly burned. mr. speaker, it was humbling to go to walter reed yesterday to see this young corporal. but he is what makes america great. his attitude is excellent, not complaining about his injuries. and i just pray to god that we will realize that if we don't

stop spending the money we don't have, that young men and women like the corporal in the years to come will not get benefits because we will be financially broke. that will be a sin and i hope it never happens. mr. speaker, i will be back next week. i will have the inspector general's estimate on the cost to stay in iraq for two more years, and i hope to have some figures i can leave and put in the record, because it is time that we have a debate on our foreign policy right here in the house of representatives. maybe we will in may. i hope so. with that, mr. speaker, as i always do i ask god to please bless our men and women in uniform, please bless the families of our men and women in uniform. in his loving arms to hold the families who gave a child who died for freedom in afghanistan and iraq. and i ask we will do what is right in the eyes of god for his people today and tomorrow. i ask god to please bless the

president that he will do what is right. mr. speaker, three times, god please, god please, god please continue to bless america. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. quigley, for five minutes. mr. quigley: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise today to celebrate chicago blackhawks television announcers, pat foley, who celebrated his 30th season with the team. as the voice of the blackhawks, he's come to define the hockey experience. it's impossible to imagine watching the stars without his play-by-play running through your head. the hockey bug hit him early. as a child at bedtime he would hide his radio underneath his pillow from his parents so he could listen to his broadcasting idol, lloyd pettit, great in his own right, call blackhawk games. but only the last two periods. much like the players themselves, pat worked his way

up to the stup -- stanley cup winning team, calling baseball and hockey games at his alma mater, m michigan state, before landing his first professional job with the grand rapids owls of the international hockey league. he joined the hawks' broadcast team in 1980 at 25 and has been a fan favorite ever since. he has earned two emmy awards for his work and was inducted into chicago sports hall of fame, joining broadcast legends. he's also been active in the local community, helping numerous charities. and he recently joined me with wounded warriors on the u.s.a. warriors team. for his hard work and dedication for making some of the greatest moments in blackhawk history even more memorable, i say thank you to pat foley. go, hawks. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from illinois, mr. kin singer, for -- kinzinger, for five

minutes. mr. kinzinger: thank you, mr. speaker. in the midst of talking about immigration reform, it's something we'll be addressing shortly, something we ought to address he very shortly, i want to come forward and share and experience i had over the last week. i'm still a pilot in the air national guard, and that's a job i have kept since i have been in congress and a job i hope to continue to keep. part of what i did last week is i actually went and worked on the border with the air national guard. we do an i.s.r., intelligence surveillance reconnaissance looking for people that have crossed illegally into our country and looking for drugs. it was a unique trip for me because most times when congressmen go to the border they actually would probably go in an official capacity as a u.s. congressman, and we have all experienced from these trips, you see what the administration, frankly, wants you to see. they take you somewhere like el

paso where there is an effective fence in place. where they don't take you is a place called mag pump. one of the areas that i worked in my capacity as an air national guard pilot, and it really was actually of disheartening what we o would see. you would see folks cross the rio grande, as we would call border control, the common assessment situation, they would literally step back and put their ankles in the water and at that point they are unapprehendible and they would stare five feet away from u.s. border patrol, and maybe 100 yards away then, another group, knowing our border patrol agent was tied up, would then cross the rio grande and make it free. or they outlast the border patrol agent and then they would step back on to u.s. territory and then when the agent came back they would play this cat and mouse game. could easily be solved with a border fence. could easily be solved with actually real border security. this isn't border security that

we are going to do because we are upset, because we are angry. but because i believe we have to have real immigration reform in this country. things like high skill needs are very important, but allowing people who want an opportunity to come to the united states, do so through a legal process. the problem we have set up now, he though, and really frankly the sad part about it, is a lot of these immigrants believe that the second they step foot in the united states of america, everything's going to be good. everything's going to be all right. and we agree this is the greatest country in the world. the problem is once many of these immigrants step into the united states of america, their journey has just begun. because the other part of where i worked in this mission over the last week was about 50 to 100 miles inland in texas. as we would find people hunkered down in very thick brush as they would try to wave and rely on their guides. many cases their guides would vacate when they hear border patrol and run away from these

groups of people hiding in the brush and would leave them stranded in the middle of the texas plains without water, food, any knowledge of where they are going. in fact, in this sector i was working last year there were 200 dead bodies found. that's only a fraction of those that actually die on this journey. he so i believe that border security is important so that we can set up a situation in which those that want to come here legally can do so. and can go through the legal process of living in the united states or eventually becoming a united states citizen and we are not creating a situation in which many of these immigrants are losing their lives. i talked to border patrol, the interesting thing i did it out of the capacity of the u.s. congressman, they knew what i did in my other job, and they said, i said if i could take one thing back to washington, what would it be? and they said, if you take back one thing to washington, tell them that even though the secretary is saying that the

border is secure, even though the administration is saying the border is secure, it is not secure. take that back. we need more border patrol agents. we need the fence. we need the ability to do our job. they are prevented from doing legal things that are humane to apprehend, in many cases, folks running and trying to escape. giving them the opportunity to do what they need to do. so, mr. speaker, i agree with those that are saying we need immigration reform in this country, and i'm a believe -- believe in that. i believe it's time we understand that america is a nation built of immigrants. my third or four generation came over from germany and i respect that and appreciate it. that's a tradition we need to continue. but i believe the first step to real immigration reform is border security. and i will tell you, mr. speaker, my trip to the border for a week as a pilot in the guard opened my eyes to the fact that we are continually exposing

ourselves not just to dope and drugs being run into this country, but into a potential of a terrorist attack on the united states. and a weapon that was run through the border of mexico because it's done every day. with that i yield back. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. mcgovern, for five minutes. mr. mcgovern: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. speaker, my grandmother used to say an apple a day keeps the doctor away. i hated it when she said that, but you know, mr. speaker, she was right. good nutritious food will keep you healthy. that's because food is medicine. fruits, vegetables, and other healthy foods like beans, legumes, grains, proteins are critical for proper development. simply put, healthy people eat healthy food. the opposite is also true. the more junk food we eat the less healthy we are.

but there are different reasons why people eat less nutritious food. many people choose to eat nonnutritious food, but there are many others who cannot afford to buy healthier options. these low-income households have to stretch their food dollars in order to make ends meet. this requires them to buy less nutritious, high calorie foods that are more affordable on a fixed income. this is why we can have an obese hungry person. they are filling their stomachs with food that isn't good for them simply because it's all they can afford, all they have access to. this kind of diet has long-term negative effects on individuals and on the communities where they live, mr. speaker. . we must look at the quality of food or lack of quality is impacting hunger in america. in a 2011 report entitled "hunger in america: suffering we are all paying for," the center for american progress estimated that the health costs for hunger were at least $130 billion each year, $130 billion

a year just for health costs related to hunger. they examined medical research and found there are serious medical consequences directly related to hunger. specifically, this research found there is likely to be higher rates of iron deficiency, headaches, stomach aches, frequency of colds, activity-limiting health impairments, more hospitalizations, longer in-patient stays and poor overall health status. along with these physical health issues, there are also mental health conditions attributable to hunger, including anxiety and irritability, depression, withdrawn behavior, suicidal thoughts and behaviors -- and other behaviors and a need for mental health services. the response is clear, mr. speaker. we must treat hunger as a health issue. it frustrates me that we in congress still act like it's a better option to spend over

$130 billion in hunger-related health costs than to prevent hunger in the first place. lost month in march, one released a white paper called "addressing hunger essential to improving health." this paper details how critically important it is to treat hunger as a health issue. it points out hungry people from all ages, from pregnant women to children to adults to seniors suffer from a lack of nutrients found in healthy foods. it results in serious health issues, the very same health issues that cost our nation over $130 billion in health care costs alone. that's nuts. doctors and nurses should be looking for signs of hunger in their patients. medical students should have more courses on nutrition. they should be treating hunger just like any other condition. if someone has high blood pressure or a rash, they get a prescription to treat their problem. doctors should be writing food prescriptions if that's what it takes to get nutritious food for the food insecure.

organizations like pro-medica in ohio, children's health watch in four locations, including boston medical center and drexel university, are trying to right this wrong. they promote health and wellness in general, but they also -- they are also treating hunger as a health issue. they are working to reduce the number of hospital readmissions by including food security in their patient's discharge plan. they want to make sure that people don't need to be readmitted to a hospital because they suffer from a setback simply because they don't have food to eat once they leave the hospital. they are also working to raise awareness about nutrition and exercise and how to treat the underserved areas. we need to learn from these organizations and others. that's why i believe it's so important that the white house convene a conference on food and nutrition. we are not going to end hunger now if we don't bring the best and brightest minds together in one place, including doctors, nurses, nutritionists, dietitians and other health

professionals. we need a plan of action and the best way to begin is with a white house conference. mr. speaker, we know that healthy food builds healthy bodies. we know that by ignoring hunger our nation pays hundreds of billions of dollars in health care costs. we know that nutritious food is good medicine for body and mind. mr. speaker, in the united states of america, the richest, most prosperous nation on earth, hunger should not be an issue. we need to come together, mr. speaker, we need to come together now, we need the president to lead on this. we need to come together and end hunger now. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from north carolina, mrs. ellmers, for five minutes. mrs. ellmers: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to discuss h.r. 1416, the cancer patient protection act of 2013. on april 1, 2013, the obama administration reduced medicare payments to the cost of cancer fighting drugs. this is having a devastating

impact on seniors fighting cancer and the nation's cancer care delivery system, which is already in crisis. the centers for medicare and m.s., said rvices, c. they don't have the authority to stop these life-saving cuts to these chemo drugs. that's why i introduced the cancer patient protection act of 2013, h.r. 1416, to ensure seniors, especially those on lower or fixed incomes, from getting treatment they need. the cuts by the obama administration are choosing to implement, will jeopardize patient access to patient care and result in higher overall costs by both seniors and the medicare program by forcing patients into costlier hospital treatment settings. the united states enjoys the most respected and most successful cancer care delivery system in the world. more than 60% of the u.s. cancer patients rely on

medicare, and until recently, over 80% of the nation's cancer patients were treated by physicians in the community setting. according to recent studies by two, community oncology clinics provide the most cost-effective model for delivering high-quality cancer services to elderly americans. despite this, a series of changes to medicare reimbursements over the past decade -- the administration has decided to apply the sequester cut both to payments for part b drugs and to the 6% services payment. a recent survey done by the community oncology alliance shows the c.m.s. cuts will force 72% of community cancer centers by stopping seeing new medicare patients or not seeing medicare patients without secondary insurance and/or to send medicare patients

elsewhere for treatment, such as costlier hospitals where treatment costs more. when community cancer centers were forced to close their doors or limit services, access to cancer care is compromised for all cancer patients, especially the vulnerable population of seniors who rely on medicare and those on fixed incomes and lower income individuals whose options are already limited. fortunately, the secretary of health and human services has the authority to protect gainst further debilitating -- debilitation in the safety net. the office of management and budget, o.m.b., directed all federal agencies to, quote, any availabl flexibility to reduce the operational risks and minimize impacts on the agency's core mission in service of the american people. and, quote, identify and address operational challenges that could potentially have a significant affect on the

agency's mission or otherwise raise life-saving or health concerns. further, the social security act compels the secretary to adhere to the average sales price base formula that congress established under the medicare modernization act of 2003. the social security act expressly mandates that the secretary reimburse physicians at 106% of a.f.p. to administer drugs, providing directions to the secretary on how they calculate the sales price. congress has distinguished the medicare drug payment methodology and these divisions warrant deference under the sequestration and guidance by the o.m.b. by passing this bill, we're ensuring that every -- everything can be done to prevent these cuts from going into effect, and i encourage my colleagues to support this important piece of legislation. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back the remainder of my

time. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from california, mr. vargas, for five minutes. mr. vargas: thank you, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to address the house. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. vargas: thank you very much, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise in favor of immigration reform, comprehensive immigration reform. i'd like to thank my colleague from illinois that spoke earlier about his experience and saying that he believes in comprehensive immigration reform. i do too. i just wish that when he was asked or when he asked the border patrol agent, there was one thing you could bring back to congress, one thing, what would that be? i wish that gentleman would have said his bible. that's what he should have said. bring your bible. that will be your best guidance. bring your bible. i believe i am allowed to read the bible, no one will tackle me? i hope i am not violating any law. if i am i am going to do it anyway, and i'd like to read from matthew 25 because matthew 25 speaks of the judgment. i think it's very important for

us to read this section. even though my mom gave to me this bible sometime ago with giant print, i still need glasses now. it reads like this -- when a man comes to his glory escorted by all the angels of heaven he will sit upon his royal thrown and all the nations will be assembled before him and he will separate them into two groups. the sheep he will place on his right hand. the goats on his left. the king will say to those on his right, come. you have my father's blessing. inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the creation of the world. for i was hungry and you gave me food. i was thirsty and you gave me drink. i was a stranger and you welcomed me. i was a stranger and you welcomed me. who is the stranger? who is the stranger among us that we welcome? i'll tell you who the stranger

is among us who we welcome. the stranger is the wife of the soldier that we spoke to three weeks ago here in washington when he came and he testified and said, i'm not afraid of dying in afghanistan or iraq. i've been on three tours of duty. what i'm afraid is my wife will get deported because she's undocumented and then who will take care of my children? she is the stranger, the soldier's wife. who is the stranger? who is the stranger among us? who is this least among us? i'll tell you who it is. it's the child and the parents who are here with a child who was born here, an american citizen, but the parents weren't so the parents can get deported and you break the family apart. and we deport the parents and we don't know what happens to the children because they go to strangers. we break this family. who is the stranger?

those parents. that child. and how we treat them is how we're going to be judged. and we have an opportunity here before us. and i'm very, very thankful now for the churches in this country. the catholic church for many years has been saying, we need humane comprehensive immigration reform. they've said it loud and clear. and now the evan jetcal churches -- evangelical churches are saying the same thing. my parish is praying we open our hearts to this. i tell you i haven't been here long but i do get the opportunity to pray with my colleagues on the republican side, and they are great people with great hearts. and i hope that god speaks to them at this point in time and says, the stranger is the soldier's wife. the stranger is the choiled whose parents are going -- child whose pearned are going to be ripped away from -- parent that are going to be

ripped away from. they want a better life for themselves. those are the strangers. and we're going to be judged. we're going to be judged on how we treat them. so we have an opportunity here. but also apart that that people say what they've done is illegal. you know, the law is interesting. i happen to be a lawyer. there's two ways to look at the law. ere's the law that says it's bad or evil. murder is malem per se. on the other side you have malem prohibitum. it means it's bad or wrong or illegal. because we mean we prohibit it. for example, if you drive 56 miles an hour in a 55-mile-an-hour zone, you've broken the law. have you done anything illegal? yes, you have. have you done anything immoral? no. the brakes were good.

we change the law and say 55 miles an hour doesn't make any sense. we change it to 60 or 65, 70. i've been through texas. 75 now. california, we only have 70. why? because the law doesn't make any sense. our immigration law doesn't make any sense. so let's change the law. let's open our hearts. let's take this bible and let's take a look at see what it says to us. what it will say is this, how we treat the stranger is how we are going to be judged as a nation. mr. speaker, thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. murphy, for five minutes. mr. murphy: thank you, mr. speaker. well, while the senate argues about gun issues and talking about what is in the hands of

those perpetrators who commit heinous crimes, i want to talk about america's shameful secret that people don't want to be talking about and that is our willful ignoring of dealing with mental illness. we have to start talking about not what is in people's hands but what is in their hearts and minds. approximately 5% of individuals with schizophrenia will die of suicide. keep in mind now suicide has overtaken all other areas of accidental deaths. it is now the leading cause of death by injury. about 38,000 per year. we understand that mental disorders are gray disorders with specific systems rooted in abnormal patterns of great activity. much of those between the ages of 14 and 25 when there are

changes occurring in the branching and pruning of brain cells. yet there is a delay between the firstp sewed of psychosis and the onset of treatment with an average of 110 weeks before someone gets care. 100,000 young americans will have a first episode of psychosis this year will join over two million others with schizophrenia. look at this, 1/6 of murderers in prison are mentally ill. other quick facts the, the number of murders in the u.s. committed with rifles 323. in 2011 more murders were committed with knives, 1,694, and blunt weapons such as clubs and hammers, 496 according to f.b.i. data. a while ago i sent a letter to the secretary of h.h.s. seeking clarification of the laws of confidentiality known as hipaa specifically asking why we have not loaded 1.5 million more

records into the national instant criminal background check data so that these people cannot purchase guns. i hope the secretary will respond soon. recently also handed a note to the president of the united states. i'll continue to pursue questions with the general accounting office asking where are we spending our money? and is it effective in going to help those with mental illness and severe mental illness? we simply don't know. in the united states an estimated 11.4 million americans, or about 4.4% of all adults suffer from serious mental illness. what happens is states in many cases to not submit those records to the national instant criminal background check. those many states that haven't submitted many at all. this is a problem. underlying all this we had better take off our blinders and deal with the underlying root cause of mass violence, untreated mental illness.

look at yesterday in the news when a man went on a campus and attacked people with a knife. look at the shootings taken place with untreated mental illness. why aren't we talking about our actions on those? our current system is especially falling short for those with a serious mental disorder who deny they are ill. half of those persons with severe psychosis don't understand they have mental illness. they refuse their medication or simply cannot function in the community setting. so what we have done historically in this country, burned them as witches, imprisoned them as dangerous. we still have not dealt with the underlying needs. there were 500,000 psychiatric beds in 1955. there's 40,000 now. we have a lack of long-term treatment options. there are gaps in the care for young adults. artificial limits and barriers to carrier insurance. four years ago we passed a mental carry law, we still don't

have the regulations for that. parents not informed and cannot get help for their children. hipaa laws and rights of privacy act which creates barriers between parents knowing what's going on with their children in school when they have a severe mental illness. there is a stigma of acknowledging there is a problem of getting treatment. politicians refer to those committing these murders as evil. as monsters. television shows where there is tragedy or comedy mock them. this is not the way to deal with the underlying problem. we have a shortage of psychologists and psychiatrist throughout this country, and the military as well where suesides have overtaken combat as the number one cause of death. i am asking for an audit from the general accounting office of every single penny spent on mental illness, diagnosis, research and treatment throughout our government. the judiciary, labor, every branch. we need to know these answers. it is a shameful secret in this country. we still refuse to deal with

mental illness. if we do not, shame on us. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia, mr. johnson, for five minutes. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. most americans watching these proceedings today are watching them on c-span. c-span is a public service created by the cable industry in 1979 to carry our house proceedings and other public affairs programming. it's carried in my district by directv, comcast, and dish network. i won't bore you with all of the content that appears on c-span. some is very interesting, and other is not. and some is not.

but nevertheless every year c-span holds a student documentary contest for middle school and high school students. and today i'm proud to announce that one of my young constituents, young man, samuel gladen, a 10th grade student at middle grove high school, eceived $250 for his honorable mention documentary, quote, education, the greatest common factor. about how education is related to the economy. i also want to congratulate mr. zach cohen, a seventh grade student at the alfred and adell davis academy in sandy springs, georgia, who received $1,500 for his second prize documentary entitled, education, take a spin.

which was about education in the united states of america. he interviewed me for this piece and i want to thank him for doing that, and i also want to congratulate both zach and samuel for winning these prizes out of nearly 2,000 entries. you can see these and other winning videos at studentcam.org. i encourage everybody that once you finish watching c-span to go will dentcam.org and it captivate you to see what

education and how our future will be affected by either our investment in education or our desire not to do that. with that i yield back the balance of my time. sip the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from arizona for five minutes. miss sinny ma -- ms. sinema: mr. speaker, i rise today to introduce the security and energy and manufacturing act of 2013. this bill will extend the advanced energy manufacturing ax credit program.

we have seen our manufacturing base erode as a result of increased global competition. not only will it help us rebuild our manufacturing industry, it while o provide -- exploring and countries all over the world are purchasing billions of dollars worth of winter, solar powered, and other green technologies. i want to see these products made in the united states and for our country to he remain competitive. we know this program works. the first allocation of funding was extremely successful in leveraging private capital and that led to the investment of over 180 energy manufacturing facilities across 43 states in our country. the amount of wind turbines and their workable components made in the u.s. has more than doubled since then, and that is just one aspect of the renewable energy field.

expanding this program also mean creating additional high tax, high-wage manufacturing jobs in our own backyard. companies like tempe's monarch power could expand and increase the creation of innovative products, ranging from energy generation to energy storage, even a mobile renewable power system. all while remaining affordable. we must partner the power of american innovation with the potential of american production. my bill encourages just that. in my home state of arizona, renewable energy enjoys broad bipartisan support. democrats and republicans, including barry goldwater jr., and our own governor, have advocated for green energy because they know the future of our state and country depends on it. i stand today with the broad coalition of leaders from my state with a long history of supporting energy innovation and a smart investment for america. we have the opportunity to

restore u.s. manufacturing jobs, help our country remain competitive in the manufacturing industry, and invest in a wide range of clean energy production. ask that the body join me in supporting the c mass of 2013. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house >> we'll have live coverage. over in the senate lawmakers resuming preliminary debate on a bill expanding background checks for gun sales, imposing tougher penalties for gun trafficking,

and offering school safety grants. and senate is expected to vote thursday on a motion to bring that bill to the floor. follow senate debate on c-span2. just a couple minutes here on c-span we expect to hear about a potential deal on gun legislation. senator joe manchin, a democrat from west virginia, and pennsylvania republican, pat toomey, reportedly worked out a deal on background checks for firearm purchases. both of the men have a-ratings from the national rifle association. they'll talk about the details of their agreement momentarily. it's scheduled for 11:00 eastern. we'll take you there live. also today it's budget day. another story we are following, president obama officially unveiling his 2014 budget plan. the president's proposal includes $3.8 trillion in spending, and $1st8 trillion in deficit reduction -- $1.8 trillion in deficit reduction. in just moments he'll be in the rose guardin at the white house. we also hear the president's budget office director, office

of budget, jeffrey -- the acting director of the budget office, will be joined at a news conference today by alan krueger, the chairman of the council of economic advisors. coming up at 12:30 eastern on c-span3. and you can also follow some of the other budget news and press conferences today online at c-span.org. defense department this afternoon at 1:00 there will be a number of presentations. let's take you live inside the senate tv gallery. pretty crowded as reporters wait for senators joe manchin and pat toomey to talk about their reported deal. the associated press says the deal would expand the checks to cover all commercial sales such as gun shows and online. private transactions, writes the a.p., not for profit such as those between relatives would be exempt. live coverage here on c-span.

>> here on c-span, we're live in the senate tv studio waiting for senators joe manchin and pat toomey to come out and talk about the reported deal on expanding background checks and gun legislation. the senate on thursday is likely to hold a vote on whether to proceed debate on gun legislation. the senate is in today. you can follow that on c-span2. meanwhile, over on c-span3, just beginning, president obama is speaking in the rose garden, talking about the release of his 2014 budget proposal, and throughout the day on the c-span networks and on c-span.org a number of briefings across washington on the 2014 budget.

>> on capitol hill, senators joe manchin and pat toomey should be speaking shortly about their reported deal on expanding background checks for purchasing firearms. a tweet from mikeo brine from nbc says that senator schumer plans to co-sponsor the manchin-toomey deal and called biden, bloomberg and gun safety groups this morning to urge their support. lso a report from cnn, a scoop, a tweet from denebash says peter king told her colleague, deidre walsh, says he plans to introduce the manchin-toomey bill in the house. that from cnn.

>> good morning. i'm going to be covering up some people's phones here. i hope i don't -- let me just say good morning to all of you. i'm very, very proud to be here with my good friend, pat toomey, from my sister state of pennsylvania and west virginia we're side by side. we come from states that have deep-rooted cultures, as you know, and we believe very strongly in that. i also want to give special thanks to two people who weren't here today who have been invaluable to this process and have worked from the beginning trying to find common ground and that is senator shuck shumer, my good friend -- senator chuck shumer, my good friend, mark kirk. mark has never left. chuck and his staff and all of them that worked so hard, i thank everybody. the staffs do yomen's job.

i also want to thank tom coburn. tom has been invaluable to the process. also coming from the culture we come from and have great input all the way through this process. i want to make it clear from the start that this is a start and this is not the end of our work. we still have a lot to do. we have an agreement, pat and i have an agreement with senator kirk and senator schumer. we have an agreement on an amendment to prevent criminals and the mentally ill and insane from getting firearms and harming people. that's extremely important for all of us. also, we agree that we need a commission on mass violence. this commission is going to be made up with people of expertise, people who have expertise in guns, people who have expertise in mental illness, people who have expertise in school safety and people who have expertise in video violence. we have a culture of violence and we have a whole generation who basically has been desensitized. if you go around and talk to the young people today it is

what it is. we have got to find out how we can change and reverse that. we also need to protect legal gun owners, legal gun owners like myself and pat who basically cherish the second amendment rights that we have. and we have done that also, but today is the start of a healthy debate that must end with the senate and house, hopefully passing these commonsense measures and the president signing it into law. back home where i come from we have commonsense, we have nonsense and now we have gunsense, and that's what we are talking about. the events at newtown, truly the events at newtown changed us all. it changed our country, our communities, our towns and it changed our hearts and minds. this amendment will not ease the pain, it will not ease the pain of the families who lost their children on that horrible day, but nobody here, and i mean not one of us in this with a itol of ours

good conscious would not sit by and try to prevent a day from that happening again. americans on both sides of the debate can and must find common ground. that's what pat and i have been working on and what we've been able to do. today's agreement is the first step in a common ground that all of us agree with crucial to keep guns out of dangerous hands and to keep our children safe. this is a bipartisan movement. it's a bipartisan amendment, and we all know that a bipartisan solution is a lasting solution, but nobody here in good conscious could sit by and not prevent a day that's happened at newtown from ever happening again. i can't say enough about my friend, pat toomey, and i just appreciate him so much for working as hard and his staff doing what they've done and for us coming together today. with that i'd like to introduce my great friend, pat toomey, from the great state of pennsylvania. >> thank you, senator manchin.

i, too, want to commend senator manchin for what he's put in this a long time. our staff have worked hard as well. we'll continue to work together i hope on many things. i also want to mention the terrific work that senator kirk has done on this. he's been an invaluable asset and important voice on this discussion and i appreciate that. let me say, pennsylvania has a long bipartisan tradition of supporting gun rights, and i've been proud to be part of that tradition and i continue to be. i'm a gun owner and the rights that are enshrined in the second amendment are very, important to me personally as i know they are to so many people across pennsylvania. my record shows this. i've got to tell you candidly i don't consider criminal background checks to be gun control. i think it's just common sense. if you pass a criminal background check, you get to buy a gun. no problem. it's the people who fail a criminal or a mental health

background check that we don't want having guns. now, my time in public life i have not taken a very high-profile role on this issue. i spend most of my time and energy focusing on policies that will help generate economic growth and job creation and put us on a path sustainable fiscal path. i'm here standing with senator manchin because over the last few months several things became apparent to me. first is that gun legislation appeared destined to reach the senate floor. it's not something i sought but i think it's something that's inevitable. second thing is it became apparent there are a number of gun control proposals that i think actually would infringe second amendment rights, and i will tell you categorycally that nothing in our vent --

categorically that nothing in our amendment would not hurt people from getting guns. there was the danger we might end up accomplishing nothing and not making progress where we could so that's when i started talking with senator manchin and senator kirk and others to see if we can find a place where there's some common ground and i think we found it. and the common ground rests on a simple proposition and that is that criminals and the dangerously mentally ill shouldn't have guns. i don't know anyone who disagrees with that premise. from either political party or whatever folks' views might be on broader gun rights issues. so if we start with the notion that dangerous criminals and dangerously mentally ill people shouldn't have guns, the question is how can we accomplish that? now, background checks are not a cure-all by any means but they can be helpful. in the 10-year period from 1999

to 2009, 1.8 million gun sales were blocked by the current background check system because people were not qualified to own a gun. now i've supported background checks in the past. i support them now. they already exist, of course, for the purchase of guns from licensed dealers. in pennsylvania, in fact, they already exist for all handgun purchases. if it passes what our measure will do it will expand background checks for purchases of firearms at gun shows and over the internet. it would not require record keeping by any private citizen. the fact is the national law we have had and pennsylvania's experience have done nothing to restrict the lawful ownership of guns by law-abiding citizens and neither will our amendment. we hear sometimes about background checks leading to an erosion of our second amendment rights, that simply hasn't happened. i am going to make sure it

doesn't. i also should point out that this amendment is a genuine compromise. in addition to extending background checks, it includes the number of measures that help to secure second amendment rights of gun owners, some items that gun owners have long sought. the bottom line for me is this, if expanding background checks to include gun shows and internet sales can reduce the likelihood of criminals and mentally ill people from getting guns and we can do it in a fashion that does not infringe on the second amendment rights of law-abiding citizens, then we should do it and in this amendment i think we do. thanks very much. >> what we'll do is we'll take some questions and you can direct them however you want to direct them. >> senator, can you tell us how you have communicated with the n.r.a., what discussions you've had and do you expect them having an opinion, support of not support of your amendment? >> i can't speak with the

n.r.a. i have been in constant dialogue and i'm sure pat has too. we take all sides into consideration. when you have senator schumer coming to the table wanting to see something progressively turned to move in the right direction, and also the direction he will come from, but to be able to work and sit down with us and from me -- with me from the beginning, having the n.r.a. sitting there, all people on all sides of the gun issue, knowing what pat has said all we're trying to do is basically saying if you go to a gun store today you're subjected to a background check. basically a lot of the states haven't done the work they should have done. we're going to make sure they do. there's incentives and penalties. next off, if you go to a gun show you'll be treated the same as if you went to a gun store, subjected to a background check. if you go online you will be subjected the same as you are if you buy a gun online in

another state. these are the things we're doing. we brought everybody to the table. we've spoken to the n.r.a. i can't tell you what their position is, but i can tell you we've done the things that pat just said we did. we've strengthened basically the rights of law-abiding gun owners like myself and pat to be able to exercise our second amendment right, but we've also i think done a tremendous favor to the citizens of our great country on background checks, expanding them to keep people's guns from people that shouldn't have them. people that have been criminally adjudicated and mentally adjudicated. >> senator, are you worried, senator toomey, doing a risky a rating to the n.r.a., does that matter to you? >> what matters to me is doing the right thing and i think this is the right thing and i think most pennsylvanians will agree that making it more difficult for criminals and mentally ill people to obtain guns is the right thing to do,

securing the rights of law-abiding citizens is the right thing to do so that's most important to me. >> are you worried your rating -- >> let me just say -- >> are you going to get more republicans on this amendment beyond yourself and senator kirk, do you believe you can attract other republicans? >> i've had conversations with several of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, but i can't speak for them yet. i think it's too soon to know how people will vote on this. >> do you have confirmation from senator reid, and is it included in the bill -- >> we have been promised and confirmed that our amendment will be the first amendment that goes on the bill. >> secondly, included in the bill guarantee that at least the two of you will vote for this bill on final passage and will encourage others to do so? >> i intend to support it with this. i cannot support it without the amendment that pat and i have worked on. >> i don't predict how i'm

going to vote on a measure that isn't defined yet. since this might very well, and i hope it will be an open amendment process, i don't know which amendments will succeed or fail so i'll make my final judgment when i see the final product. >> can you talk about what the reaction has been to your plan from your fellow republicans? what do they say to you? >> well, it's ranged. there are some people that are very interested in learning more and they're interested and they are openly considering whether they might embrace this approach. others are very not interested. it kind of runs the gamut. >> are you saying all private sales or some private sales? two people that don't know each other -- >> let me make it very clear, what we have done, if you go to a gun show, that's -- you have to do all background checks and have to be recorded with an f.f.f., a federal firearms licensed dealer, the same thing if you go to a gun store. that would be a licensed

dealer. if you go online, the same. other than that, no. personal transfers are not touched whatsoever. all personal transfers are not touched whatsoever. we've done these, too, and we've done them and done them right. >> senator toomey, you mentioned there were items in there that were expanding gun rights and i want to hear more about that. >> the way i would characterize it is securing gun rights. i think we distributed a list. i will give you a couple of examples. occasionally happens that a law-abiding citizen who has every legal right to own a weapon is transporting it from one state to another, maybe going hunting, maybe he's bringing it to his son or daughter, he's transporting it in the proper fashion but he has to go across a state that might require a license, for instance, he doesn't have a license in that state and sometimes that person, maybe he has to stop for gas or stay overnight in a hotel, that person shouldn't be subject to criminal prosecution when he's

doing something that's really lawful. second example i'll give you and there are others. current law forbids active duty military personnel from buying a gun in their own state. i think that's terrible policy. they are only permitted to buy a gun in the state which they are stationed. what we would do is change that and allow an active duty military folks to buy a gun in their home state. so that's just two examples. >> right back here. >> both senators, in the past you've expressed and he have' worked for national concealed-carry reciprocity. you've touched upon a little bit, senator toomey. is this the first step towards national reciprocity for conceal-carry for you? >> yes. i support it. i hope we get there. >> it gives us better control, if you will. it really gives us better control and treats people fair. you can't look -- pat and i and somebody of you who are law-abiding gun owners and enjoy going hunting and

shooting like we do, we can't assume people because we enjoy that -- the second amendment rights that we have that there's something wrong. we'll make sure we do it in a safe manner and we'll treat it fairly. with that, this goal is to make sure that the people that shouldn't have them are not going to have access to the guns through a gun show, internet sales or at the gun store as we do now. >> there would be a process like this. 700 people up in la guardia and j.f.k. airport who are carrying guns when they travel, this bill would create a mechanism if they are caught? >> if they have a permit to carry and go through an extensive background check to get a conceal-carry, then they will be treated as law-abiding citizens and not as criminals just because they are in a state that doesn't accept that. >> what do you think the prospects are for this amendment on the senate floor, and should the senate pass something, what are the prospects in the house?

>> my answer is i don't know. i'm looking forward to the debate. i'm hopeful, but i think this is a fluid situation and it's hard to predict. >> let me just say this, i have spoken this morning with all of my friends in the gun -- in the gun state of west virginia, the gun culture of west virginia, the people who appreciate and enjoy the rights that they have and i explained by detail what the bill does. and i think i have support from who would be the most critical gun advocates as anybody in the country. they understand this is common sense. this is gun sense. we are not infringing on the rights of an individual citizen, but basically if you are going to go to a gun show you should be subjected to the same as if you went to the gun store. if you're going to go online you should be the same as if you brought the gun across state lines the same as you are in state, intrastate versus interstate. this makes sense. and having a commission on mass

violence, talk to your children who are watching these video games today, talk to the people at newtown, basically, and i -- if we had bulletproof glass could we have prevented it? these aren't things we've taken into consideration before. there are -- why are we not treating mental illness? >> have you reached out to house republicans or people in the philadelphia suburbs about supporting this? >> i have had several consideration conversations with some of our house colleagues and there are a substantial number of house people that agree with this. they want to look at specifics of the legislation. there are those in the house that support this. thank you very much. >> thank you so much. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> senators manchin and toomey

announcing their amendment to the gun legislation which would broaden background checks for firearms purchases. on the senate floor they are in preliminary consideration of a motion to advance the bill to the senate floor for debate. a possible and likely vote on thursday. 60 votes will be needed to cut off debate. senator manchin saying in that news confor instance that their proposed amendment would be -- was confirmed, their amendment would be considered first if that is brought to the house -- the senate floor, rather. of course, you can follow the senate on c-span2. we've been following some of the comments on twitter using the #guncontrol. david beltran tweets, senator toomey is a thinking republican. has agreed to a compromise bill to expand background checks, yet no gun control. i approve. governor cuomo of new york tweeting, majority of americans want reasonable gun control, gun owners, also. and from truthrestoration

saying if so many americans support gun control as the left claims, why the big push by the left dog media and campaigns to convince us? smells bad. the #guncontrol. also today in washington, the president unveiled his nearly $3.8 trillion budget just moments ago at the white house. you can read that budget. we have a link to it on our website, c-span.org. here are the president's comments from the rose garden. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states and mr. jeff zinets. -- jeff zients. >> good morning, everybody. [applause] please, please have a seat. well, as president, my top priority is to do everything i can to reignite what i consider to be the true engine of the

american economy, rising, thriving middle class. that's what i think about every day. that's the driving force behind every decision that i make. over the past three years, our businesses have created nearly 6.5 million new jobs, but we know we can help them create more. corporate profits are at an all-time high, but we have to get wages and incomes rising as well. our deficits are falling at the fastest pace in years, but wuck do more to bring them down in a balanced and responsible way. the point is our economy is poised for progress. as long as washington doesn't get in the way. frankly, the american people deserve better than what we've been seeing, a short sided crisis-driven decisionmaking like the reckless across-the-board spending cuts that are already hurting a lot of communities out there. cuts that economists predict will cost us hundreds of

thousands of jobs during the course of this year. if we want to keep rebuilding our economy on a stronger, more stable foundation, then we got to get smarter about our priorities as a nation. and that's what the budget i'm sending to congress today represents. a fiscally responsible blueprint for middle-class jobs and growth. for years the debate in this town has raged between reducing our deficits at all costs and making the investments necessary to grow our economy. this budget answers that argument because we can do both. we can grow our economy and shrink our deficits. in fact, as we saw in the 1990's, nothing shrinks deficits faster than a growing economy. that's been my goal since i took office, and that should be our goal going forward. at a time when too many americans are looking for work,

my budget begins by making targeted investments in areas that will create jobs right now and prime our economy to keep generating good jobs down the road. as i said in my state of the union address, we should ask ourselves three questions every day -- how do we make america a magnet for new jobs, how do we give our workers the skills they need to do those jobs and how do we make sure that hard work leads to a decent living? to make america a magnet for good jobs, this budget invests in new manufacturing hubs to help turn regions left behind by globalization into global centers of high-tech jobs. we'll spark new american innovation and industry with cutting edge research like the initiative i announced to map the human brain and cure disease. we'll continue our march towards energy independence and address the threat of climate change. and our rebuild america partnership will attract private investment to put construction workers back on the job rebuilding our roads,

our bridges and our schools. in turn, attracting more new business to communities across the country. to help workers earn the skills they need to fill those jobs, we'll work with states to make high-quality preschool available to every child in america. and we're going to pay for it by raising taxes on tobacco products that harm our young people. it's the right thing to do. [applause] we'll reform our high schools and job training programs to equip more americans with the skills they need to compete in the 21st century economy. and we'll help more middle-class families afford the rising cost of college. to make sure hard work is rewarded, we'll build new ladders of opportunity into the middle class for anybody who's willing to work hard to climb them. so we'll partner with 20 of our communities hit hardest by the recession to help them improve

housing and education and business investment and we should make the minimum wage a wage you can live on because no one who works full time should have to raise his or her family in poverty. [applause] my budget also replaces the foolish across-the-board spending cuts that are already hurting our economy. and i have to point out that many of the same members of congress who supported deep cuts are now the ones complaining about them the loudest as they hit their own communities. of course, the people i feel for are the people who are directly feeling the pain of these cuts, the people who can least afford it. they're hurting military communities that have already sacrificed enough. they're hurting middle-class families. there are children who have had to enter a lottery to determine which of them get to stay in their head start programs with their friends.

there are seniors who depend on programs like meals on wheels so they can live independently but are seeing their services cut. that's what the so-called sequester means. some people may not have been impacted but there are a lot of folks who are being increasingly impacted all across this country, and that's why my budget replaces these cuts with smarter ones, making long-term reforms, eliminating actual waste and programs we don't need any more. so building new roads and bridges, educating our children from the youngest age, helping more families afford college, making sure that hard work pays , these are things that should not be partisan, they should not be controversial, we need to make them happen. my budget makes these investments to grow our economy and create jobs and it does so without adding a dime to our deficits. now, on the topic of deficits,

despite all the noise in approximate washington, here's a clear and -- in washington, here's a clear and unasailable fact. our deficits are already falling. over the past two years, i've signed legislation that will reduce our deficits by more than $2.5 trillion, more than 2/3 of it through spending cuts, and the rest through asking the wealthiest americans to be paying their fair share. that doesn't mean we don't have more work to do, but here's how we finish the job. my budget will reduce our deficits by nearly another $2 trillion so that all told we will have surpassed the goal of $4 trillion in deficit reduction that independent economists believe we need to stabilize our finances, but it does so in a balanced and responsible way, a way that most americans prefer. both parties, for example,

agree that the rising costs of caring for an aging generation is the single biggest driver of our long-term deficits. and the truth is for those like me who deeply believe in our social insurance programs think it's one of the core things that our government needs to do if we want to keep medicare working as well as it has, and we want to preserve the ironclad guarantee that medicare represents, then we're going to have to make some changes. but they don't have to be drastic ones. and instead of making drastic ones later, what we should be doing is making some manageable ones now. the reforms i'm proposing will strengthen medicare for future generations without undermining that ironclad guarantee that medicare represents. we'll reduce our government's medicare bills by finding new ways to reduce the cost of health care, not by shifting the costs to seniors or the poor or families with

disabilities. there are reforms that keeps the promise we made to our seniors, basic security that's rock solid and dependable and there for you when you need it. that's what my budget represents. my budget does also contain the compromise i offered speaker boehner at the end of last year, including reforms championed by republican leaders in congress. and i don't believe that all these ideas are optimal, but i'm willing to accept them as part of a compromise. if and only if they contain protections for the most vulnerable americans. but if we're serious about deficit reduction, then these reforms have to go hand in hand with reforming our tax code, to make it more simple and more fair so that the wealthiest individuals and biggest corporations cannot keep taking advantage of loopholes and deductions that most americans don't get. that's the bottom line.

if you're serious about deficit reduction, then there's no excuse to keep these loopholes open. they don't serve an economic purpose. they don't grow our economy. they don't put people back to work. all they do is to allow folks who are already well-off and well connected game the system. if anyone thinks i'll finish the job of deficit reduction on the backs of middle-class families or through spending cuts alone, that actually hurt our economy short term, they should think again. when it comes to deficit reduction, i've already met republicans more than halfway, so in the coming days and weeks, i hope that republicans will come forward and demonstrate that there -- they're serious about the deficits and debt as they claim to be. so growing our economy, creating jobs, shrinking our deficits, keeping our promise

to the generation that made us great but also investing in the next generation, the next generation that will make us even greater, these are not conflicting goals. we can do them in concerts. that's what my budget does. that's why i'm so grateful for the great work that jeff zients and his team has done in shaping this budget. the numbers work. there's not a lot of smoke and mirrors in here. and if we can come together, have a serious, reasoned debate not driven by politics and come together around common sense and compromise, then i'm confident we'll move this country forward and leave behind something better for our children. that's our task. thank you. god bless you. god bless the united states of america. [applause]

>> president obama about a half an hour ago at the white house. he'll host a number of republican senators at the white house for dinner this evening this as he released the 2014 budget proposal. reaction from hal rogers who ays in part it is -- >> earlier today house republican leaders including speaker john boehner commented on entitlement reform in the 2014 budget request but overall he said the president has backtracked on the issue. >> good morning, everyone. house republicans passed a balanced budget that will help foster a healthier economy and to help create jobs. unfortunately, the president's budget never comes to balance.

every family has to balance its budget. washington should as well. the american people know you can't continue to spend money that you don't have. the federal government has spent more than what it has brought in in 55 of the last 60 years. now, think about this. you can't continue to go on like this. that's why we came forward with -- that it is time for washington to deal with the spending problem, and while the president has backtracked on some of his entitlement reforms that were in conversations that we had a year and a half ago, he does deserve some credit for some incremental entitlement reforms he has outlined in his budget. but i would hope that he would not hold hostage these modest reforms for his demand for bigger tax hikes. listen, why don't we do what we can agree to do?

why don't we find the common ground that we do have and move on them? the president got his tax hikes in january. we don't need to be raising taxes on the american people. so i'm hopeful in the coming weeks we'll have an opportunity through the budget process to come to some agreement. >> good morning. finally the president has offered his budget to the american people. and what we see inside the document is more of the same. more spending, higher taxes, more debt. now, the speaker talked about the fact that there are some things in the budget beyond the tax increases that frankly we can find some agreement on. and i share the sentiment that we ought to see if we can set aside the divisiveness and come together to produce -- dwissiveness and come together to produce results that people sent us here to do. if the president believes, as

we do, that the programs like medicare, medicaid, social security are on the path to bankruptcy and that we actually can do some things to put them back on the right course and save them to protect the beneficiaries of these programs, we ought to do so. and we ought to do so without holding them hostage for more tax hikes. as the speaker indicated, listen, the disagreements we have in this town are well published and well-known, but let's start anew and try and say, look, set aside these differents and let's come together on the things we can agree on. i think most people do that in their daily lives and expect nothing less of us here in washington. >> well, now that we've -- we'll see the president's budget finally, we'll have clear differences. the president's budget does not

balance. this is a challenge that we have. you know, nothing came stronger in showing that until yesterday. yesterday i took a group of freshmen down to watch the selling of our debt. you know, we do that every monday and tuesday. other times we expand it out to other days. you walk into the room and you watch the billions of dollars being sold and you watch who's buying it. from rates happens to be low right now, but just the increase in the interest rate itself can break us. but the addition day after day after day, this is the moment, the opportunity and truthfully it's the fairness of the american people to put a path onto a balanced budget. i look forward to the day we don't have to go to borrow in the aspect of where we're going. and as i took these freshmen members around and they looked into the glass as the minutes

-- the billions of dollars went out, you know how long we're borrowing, a simple month, because we have to come right back again and do it one more time. that to me is the real challenge and the differences between these two budgets. this is an opportunity to come together with one simple goal, find a budget that will balance. >> as we remember a great leader, margaret thatcher, this week i thought i would just share a quote in the words of margaret thatcher. you may have to fight a battle more than once to win it. as we stand here before you today, it's the same battle. it's a battle for america's future, for the policies that are going to make america strong, that are going to create jobs, that are going to make a stronger economy, that are going to keep taxes lower so that families have more

take-home pay and that also that the congress is doing its job as far as putting forward a budget, ours that balances in 10 years and provides that certainty and that confidence so that people can make decisions moving forward. and the reason that it is important is because it does impact the college grads that are out there trying to find jobs and it impacts families that are continuing to struggle, the seniors that do not have confidence as to these safety net programs. and when i was home over the break, i continued to hear this message everywhere i went in eastern washington, d.c., the continued concerns over our economy, the struggles to find jobs, the uncertainty over what tax rates are going to be or what health care reform is going to be going forward. and our basic responsibility is to get a budget in place and one that balances in 10 years is one that will provide that confidence and that certainty for the american people that they need so that america will

be stronger and a better country. >> well, we do honor margaret thatcher this week. i so admired her courage, her strength of character and her conservative leadership. and she provided such a role model. that's probably the reason both cathy and i have her top of mind this morning. and she also once said, i love argument, i love debate. and so today we will continue the debate in washington in gusto in honor of margaret thatcher. and there are so many major issues to debate because the american people are hurting, and we will delve into the president's budget this morning and learn more about it. but it appears at this point to be very much a status quo budget, that just has more of

the same, more tax increases, more spending, more debt, more deficit, higher unemployment, less g.d.p. growth. that stands in stark contrast to the republican vision that we laid out a few short weeks ago, a budget that balances in 10 years, that puts us on a path to energy independence which is great for american manufacturing and families concerned about their pocketbook. it has fundamental comprehensive tax reform in it which ends crony capitalism, stops picking winners and losers, closes special interest loopholes, makes a fairer, flatter tax code for all americans. it addresses the issue of our autopilot spending programs, setting aside everyone who's 55 and older, making no changes to those in retirement or near retirement but saves those programs for the young people that are coming up. and most importantly, it

increases economic growth and opportunity, encourages job creation here in the united states. so we look forward to a ontinued debate this week. >> well, thank you. i want to thank the leadership team for inviting me here today. this is my first opportunity to greet most of you. my name's luke messer, i'm a congressman from east central and southeastern indiana, indiana's sixth congressional district. i want to echo the comments made by others that we're encouraged to see in this budget the fact that the president mentioned entitlement reform but discouraged to see him lock that reform into his demand for further tax increases. you know, everybody up here has family members, friends and neighbors who are dependent on social security and medicare. in my case, i was raised in a single parent family by a mother who's nearing

retirement. she still works at the delta faucet factory in greensburg. i have an 85-year-old grandmother who worked her whole life as a cook and janitor. both are dependent on social security and medicare and would not be able to make it through their reteerment if these programs are not protected and preserved. the president was fond of saying in his campaign it's simply math. well, the simple math is if you are not reforming medicare and social security, then you see these programs fail. it's not acceptable that happen. the of preponderance of the evidence indicated in this bument that he would support the reform of social security and medicare. if that's the idea then let's go to work on doing that work and not tie that important improvement to further tax increases. thank you. >> speaker boehner, around 1:00, senators manchin and

toomey are expected to send an amendment to gun control for background checks. >> any bill that passes the senate we'll review it. in the meantime we'll look at hearings looking at the source of violence in our country, but i want to wait and sew what actually passes over in the senate. >> will the house veto that legislation? there's some concern among democrats that it will be a pocket veto. >> the senate passes a bill, the house will review it. >> on the specific issue, though, are house republicans opened to the idea of expanding background checks for gun purchases? and how much would senator toomey's endorsement, a known conservative, help with, you know, help with that? >> well, we'll wait and see what the senate does. it's one thing for two members to come to some agreement. it doesn't substitute the will for the other 98 members. so we'll wait and see what the senate does. >> what do you think -- should something like this be put into

law? >> what i think is that we're going to review whatever the senate might pass. >> recently, you said that you supported real background checks for everyone. this bill only limits it -- >> no, no. no, that's not what i said. one of the issues that we have today is that if there is a background check required that they don't actually check all the backgrounds. that's what i was suggesting. we're not enforcing the laws that we have on the books today. and so we're going to have a background check that's in the law, let's make sure we do our real background check which not in every case happens. just limiting to internet sales and gun shows, it doesn't create any kind of national registry. is this something that you think house republicans can --

>> again, i think it's important for the senate to do its work. and once they do their work, we'll be happy to review it. >> what's the best way for republicans to deal with debt limit this time around? >> i think we made it clear that the sequester will stay in place until we have cuts and reforms that puts us on a path to balance the budget over the next 10 years. and if -- as we look at the debt limit, those are the kind of changes that we believe will be important that would allow us to increase the debt limit. thanks. >> mr. speaker, on the budget -- budget question, is the [inaudible] >> and by the way, the house gavels in for legislative work in just over 10 minutes. noon eastern. live coverage here on c-span. reaction to the president's budget from budget committee chairman in the house, paul ryan, saying i'm disappointed by the president's proposal because it merely ratifies the status quo. it doesn't break new ground.

it goes over old ground. it takes more from families to spend more in washington. chris van hollen, his counterpart in the budget committee said, all budgets are now public. next step is a conference committee to hash out the differences. we're ready when you are, g.o.p. leadership. reminder at 12:30, jeffrey zients will be talking about the president's budget proposal. live coverage on c-span3 at 12:30 eastern. you can also read the budget. we've linked it online at c-span.org. here's the president from just about an hour ago, releasing and announcing his budget. >> ladies and gentlemen, the president of the united states and mr. jeff zients. >> good morning, everybody. please, please have a seat. >> well, as my president, my top priority would be to do everything i can to reignite

the true engine of the american economy, a rising, thriving middle class. that's what i think about every day. that's the driving force behind every decision that i make. we know we can help them create more. corporate profits are at an all-time high, but we have to get wages and incomes rising as well. our deficits are falling. at the fastest pace in years. but we can do more to bring them down in a balanced and responsible way. our economy is poised for progress as long as congress doesn't get in a way. the american people deserve better than the short sided crisis-driving decisionmaking like the reckless across-the-board spending cuts that are hurting communities out there, cuts that economists

predict will cost us hundreds of thousands of jobs during the course of this year. if with he want to keep rebuilding our economy on a more stable foundation then we got to get smarter about our riorities as a nation. and that's what the budget i'm sending to the congress today represents, a fiscally responsible blueprint for iddle-class jobs and growth. for years the debate in this town has waged reducing our deficits at all costs and making investments necessary to grow our economy. this budget answers that argument because we can do oth. we can grow our economy and shrink our deficits. as we saw in the 1990's, nothing shrinks our deficits faster than a growing economy. that's been my goal since i took office and that should be ur goal going forward.

at a time when too many americans are looking for work, my budget begins by making targeted investmentes that will create jobs right now and prime our economy to keep generating good jobs down the road. as i said in my state of the union address, we should ask ourselves three questions every day -- how do we make america a magnet for new jobs, how do we give our workers the skills they need to do those jobs and how do we make sure that hard work leads to a decent living? this budget invests in new manufacturing hubs to help turn regions left behind by globalization into global centers of high-tech jobs. we'll spark new american innovation and industry with cutting edge research like the initiative i announced to map the human brain and cure disease. we'll continue our march towards energy independence and address the threat of climate hange. and our rebuild america partnership will attract private investment to put

construction workers back on the job rebuilding our roads, our bridges and our schools. in turn, attracting more new business to communities across the country. to help workers earn the skills they need to fill those jobs, we'll work with states to make high-quality preschool available to every child in america. and we're going to pay for it by raising taxes on tobacco products that harm our young people. it's the right thing to do. [applause] we'll reform our high schools and job training programs to equip more americans with the skills they need to compete in the 21st century economy. and we'll help more middle-class families afford the rising cost of college. to make sure hard work is rewarded, we'll build new ladders of opportunity into the middle class for anybody who's willing to work hard to climb them. so we'll partner with 20 of our communities hit hardest by the recession to help them improve

housing and education and business investment and we should make the minimum wage a wage you can live on because no one who works full time should have to raise his or her family in poverty. [applause] my budget also replaces the foolish across-the-board spending cuts that are already hurting our economy. and i have to point out that many of the same members of congress who supported deep cuts are now the ones complaining about them the loudest as they hit their own communities. of course, the people i feel for are the people who are directly feeling the pain of these cuts, the people who can least afford it. they're hurting military communities that have already sacrificed enough. they're hurting middle-class families. there are children who have had to enter a lottery to determine which of them get to stay in their head start programs with their friends. there are seniors who depend on

programs like meals on wheels so they can live independently but are seeing their services cut. that's what the so-called sequester means. some people may not have been impacted but there are a lot of folks who are being increasingly impacted all across this country, and that's why my budget replaces these cuts with smarter ones, making long-term reforms, eliminating actual waste and programs we don't need any more. so building new roads and bridges, educating our children from the youngest age, helping more families afford college, making sure that hard work pays, these are things that should not be partisan, they should not be controversial, we need to make them happen. my budget makes these investments to grow our economy and create jobs and it does so without adding a dime to our eficits.

now, on the topic of deficits, despite all the noise in wash exhere's a clear and unasailable fact. our deficits are already falling. over the past two years, i've signed legislation that will reduce our deficits by more than $2.5 trillion, more than 2/3 of it through spending cuts, and the rest through asking the wealthiest americans to be paying their fair share. that doesn't mean we don't have more work to do, but here's how we finish the job. y budget will reduce our deficits by nearly another $2 trillion so that all told we will have surpassed the goal of $4 trillion in deficit reduction that independent economists believe we need to stabilize our finances, but it does so in a balanced and responsible way, a way that most americans prefer. both parties, for example, agree that the rising costs of

caring for an aging generation is the single biggest driver of our long-term deficits. and the truth is for those like me who deeply believe in our social insurance programs think it's one of the core things that our government needs to do if we want to keep medicare working as well as it has, and we want to preserve the ironclad guarantee that medicare represents, then we're going to have to make some changes. but they don't have to be drastic ones. and instead of making drastic ones later, what we should be doing is making some manageable ones now. the reforms i'm proposing will strengthen medicare for future generations without undermining that ironclad guarantee that medicare represents. we'll reduce our government's medicare bills by finding new ways to reduce the cost of health care, not by shifting the costs to seniors or the poor or families with disabilities.

there are reforms that keeps the promise we made to our seniors, basic security that's rock solid and dependable and there for you when you need it. that's what my budget epresents. my budget does also contain the compromise i offered speaker boehner at the end of last year, including reforms championed by republican leaders in congress. and i don't believe that all these ideas are optimal, but i'm willing to accept them as part of a compromise. if and only if they contain protections for the most vulnerable americans. but if we're serious about deficit reduction, then these reforms have to go hand in hand with reforming our tax code, to make it more simple and more fair so that the wealthiest individuals and biggest corporations cannot keep taking advantage of loopholes and deductions that most americans don't get. that's the bottom line.

if you're serious about deficit reduction, then there's no excuse to keep these loopholes open. they don't serve an economic purpose. they don't grow our economy. they don't put people back to work. all they do is to allow folks who are already well-off and well-connected game the system. if anyone thinks i'll finish the job of deficit reduction on the backs of middle-class families or through spending cuts alone, that actually hurt our economy short term, they should think again. when it comes to deficit reduction, i've already met republicans more than halfway, so in the coming days and weeks, i hope that republicans will come forward and demonstrate that they're serious about the deficits and debt as they claim to be. so growing our economy, creating jobs, shrinking our deficits, keeping our promise

to the generation that made us great but also investing in the next generation, the next generation that will make us even greater, these are not conflicting goals. we can do them in concerts. that's what my budget does. that's why i'm so grateful for he great work that jeff zients and his team have done in shaping this budget. the numbers work. there's not a lot of smoke and mirrors in here. and if we can come together, have a serious, reasoned debate not driven by politics and come together around common sense and compromise, then i'm confident we'll move this country forward and leave behind something better for our children. that's our task. thank you. god bless you. god bless the united states of america. [applause] >> president obama an hour ago

at the white house. a reminder you can read the president's budget linked on our website, c-span.org. lots more coverage online as well. next up here on c-span, we'll take you live to the u.s. house. they gavel in momentarily to consider a bill today which would streamline permitting of small hydropower projects by exempting the projects from certain federal and environmental review. votes expected between 1:30 and 278. the speaker: the house will come to order. the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy. chaplain conroy: let us pray. eternal god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. members of congress are powerful people. their words bear weight and their positions before the people deserve respect. therefore they need to be steeled from arrogance on one side and casual routine on the

other. lord, only the two-edged sword of your word and your purity of spirit can bring freshness to their spirits and confirming hope to their constituents. strengthen their pledge to uphold the constitution against blatant and subtle attacks and to serve the people with all their hearts. then may their speech, their decisions and their working together within the pluralism of this democracy be for your greater honor and 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 1rk the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance today will be led by the gentlelady from hawaii, mrs. gabbard. ms. gabbard: 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 receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the president of the united states. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker: mr. secretary. the secretary: i am directed by the president of the united states to deliver to the house of representatives a message in writing. the speaker: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker: without objection. >> mr. speaker, we all want to prevent gun violence, but anything we do must start by respecting the second amendment. mr. johnson: sadly, a member of this house ignored that constitutional right last week. she claimed that banning certain kinds of gun magazines would somehow stop killers from

killing. she actually said if congress would ban gun magazines they will simply disappear as they're used up. of course, that's not true. you see, gun magazines are reloadable, much like a stapler. mr. speaker, i hope i can be an asset to my colleagues who may not know how guns work, because as a gun owner and an air force veteran myself, i actually exercised my second amendment rights. perhaps those of us who understand the subject matter should lead the effort to stop gun violence. my colleagues' poor understanding of guns will lead to poor policy. here are some reading material to help bring her up to speed. it's called the second amendment. it says the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does jeaflt texas seek recognition? -- the gentlelady from texas seek recognition? ms. jackson lee: to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: i too adhere to the second amendment as all of us do and i can assure the gentleman that anything we do with sensible gun legislation that will protect the lives of babies whose lives were lost in newtown and aurora and virginia tech and columbine will be fair and just. i hope my colleagues on the senate will adhere to those of us sending them a letter not filibuster but real gun sensible legislation. let me turn to the budget and indicate that it's important that we rid ourselves the sequester and put on the floor h.r. 900. i think the president saved dollars out of the iraq and afghan war, over $1 billion, and provided security for $222 ies and $2 -- million for gun legislation, in this instance of social security, seniors are paying more money for health care.

they will not be able to compensate. those who are poor and vulnerable will be worse off after the changed c.p.i. i join with many, many members of the united states congress to say we can make social security solvent, medicare solvent, medicaid solvent, but we must not have the changed c.p.i. i oppose it and many others. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from alabama seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from alabama is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. april 15, the dreaded tax day, is almost here. according to the nonpartisan tax foundation, americans will have to work 108 days this year just to be able to pay their taxes. mr. bonner: 108 days, that's just not right, and americans are sick of it. the good news is congress has a chance to do something about it this year. mr. rogers: so what would the average american want to see in a tax code? i think number one, lower tax rates on individuals and

businesses with an assurance that those rates will remain low. number two, no ridiculous special interest loopholes or giveaways, especially those that have nothing to do with creating jobs. and number three, making sure that everyone pays their fair share. if congress aims for these goals, americans should get a tax code that encourages work and investment resulting in economic growth and job creation. and let's not forget we cannot allow any future growth generated revenue to be spent on wasteful government programs. instead, the revenue should go toward eliminating the deficit and paying down our debt. let's cut spending, lower our deficit and fix our loophole-ridden tax code. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from rhode island seek recognition? mr. cicilline: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for one minute. mr. cicilline: mr. speaker, later today i will join house democratic whip steny hoyer to announce our make it in america agenda, a legislative package that will help reinvigorate our

manufacturing sector and grow american manufacturing jobs. these bills will help put our country back to work by helping to create good-paying jobs. the kind of jobs that built the american middle class of this country. earlier this year i introduced one such proposal, make it in america manufacturing act, which establishes a competitive grant program that will help small to medium-sized manufacturers retrain their workers and compete in the 21st century. senator gillibrand of new york introduced a companion bill in the senate that's co-sponsored by jack reed and sheldon whitehouse. these are the commonsense proposals we need to support if we are going to get our economy on the right track and get our people back to work. i ask my colleagues to support the make it in america agenda and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition?

>> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from tennessee is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, president obama's budget is 65 days late and trillions of dollars short. and while his plan contains plenty of tax increases, budgetary gimmicks and stimulus-style spending, it fails to adequately address our nation's unsustainable deficits and debt. in fact, the president's budget would never balance. i share president obama's view of a thriving middle class and strong manufacturing base, but the policies put forth in his budget shows the white house is more focused on increasing the size of government than growing the private sector. mr. desjarlais: if the our ent is going to help country, he needs to reduce government red tape, create a fair and flatter tax code and ending the deficit spending. i urge the president to join us in putting forth a sound -- putting forth sound policies that will grow jobs and put our country back on a sustainable

path. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for one minute. mr. higgins: mr. speaker, in western new york we don't expect anything to be handed to us. history has taught us that we have to fight for what we deserve. our community just won two recent victories against federal bureaucracies by standing up and demanding better. when the veterans administration decided to cancel the golden age games just two months before they were to be held in buffalo and stick our community with a $2.2 million loss, the community fought back. last week the v.a. reversed its decision and announced the games would proceed as planned. when the army corps of engineers decided to prohibit access to squall island pier in buffalo, a popular fishing destination on the waterfront, we pushed back hard. this morning i met with corps

officials. they assured me that public access to the site would continue. western new yorkers won two victories in two weeks because we stood up for ourselves. let this be a lesson to our community and a warning to the federal bureaucracy. when you make senseless decisions that hurt western new york you are going to have a fight on your hands. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from kansas is recognized for one minute. >> it's an honor today to tell you about one really, really good man who was born in kansas and later became an ordained preach in wichita in 1940. this very good man, a fellow pe, this time entering the korean battlefield with his unit, the third battalion of the first calvary division. mr. pompeo: there we saw what comes of a good man when placed in dangerous times.

he became a hero. he died after saving hundreds of lives on the battlefield and in a prisoner of war camp having dedicated himself to the spiritual health of his fellow -- president obama will destow upon him the medal of honor, america's highest military honor. i want to take this moment to recognize his fellow p.o.w.'s who never waivered in getting this medal for the father and for the catholic diocese of wichita. i want to thank the fellow members of this body who supported this to allow a waiver for the statutory time exemption so he could receive this award. the father is a true american hero, a hero of mankind and so deserving of this medal of honor. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute.

>> mr. speaker, i rise today to congratulate the pleasant grove high school boy's basketball team for recently winning the division i state championship. . bera: they displaced sportsmanship and teamwork and hoisted the division i state championship. when forward matt was asked about the victory, he told reporters, we don't have the biggest names but we play hard and together with great chemistry. and we won because we're a team. matt was right. the eagles won because they were accountable to each other. the dedication and commitment of the players, coaches, fans and parents made this victory possible. the teamwork displayed by pleasant grove boy's basketball team is an example for washington. in congress we need to work together and hold each other accountable and work as a team. congratulations, again, to the eagles for your tremendous victory. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> 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. >> mr. speaker, our country has a proud history of honoring our military heroes and in doing so we place an emphasis on recognizing service members whose actions place themselves in harm's way for the benefit of our nation and their fellow soldiers. i have serious concerns about the department of defense placement of the newly established distinguished warfare medal and the order of precedence. surely it is appropriate to recognize service members who make contributions through technology driven warfare. mr. calvert: however, i agree with the v.f.w. that we must continue to preserve the sagtity of those who sacrificed their personal safety for the safety of the country and their brothers in arms. that is why i strongly support the effort led by my friend, congressman duncan hunter, who is a decorated veteran himself, to have ranks below the purple heart in precedence.

i would encourage all of my colleagues to join me by co-sponsoring his bill, h.r. 833, and urge for its passage. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from hawaii seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. gabbard: last week i had the chance to visit afghanistan to get a firsthand perspective of the status of our withdrawal as well as to visit some of our deployed hawaii troops. our service members continue to serve with the highest level of professionalism, selflessness and integrity. i am grateful to them and their families. our military and civilian personnel in afghanistan are committed to the ongoing transfer of responsibility for security to the afghan national security forces, the afghan forces are made up of warriors who are ready to fight and who are already leading a majority of the security operations, building confidence in their ability to with stand the taliban and insurgency threats.

the u.s. drawdown is crucial for our military and our resources to focus on addressing imminent and direct threats like north korea, along with guam and alaska, hawaii's families have been placed in the crosshairs of this threat. we cannot be complacent. we must take action to ensure that our families and assets are protected and defended. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from north carolina seek recognition? ms. foxx: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. foxx: mr. speaker, the president finally decided to join the budget discussion today. good. it's high time he got off the sidelines. the contrast between the president's budget and the balanced house republican budget is stark. the president relies on stimulus and taxes. house republicans rely on government spending restraint and reform to achieve economic growth. if recent history is any indication, we chose the better

path. examine this president's track record of growing the economy. government spending is up, work force participation is down. national debt is up, family take-home pay is down. if president obama's trillion-dollar stimulus didn't work, how is a shallow imitation going to help us now? the president's budget will never balance and will yield an endless string of deficits. the republican path to prosperity requires washington to make do with a little less and keeps money in the private sector where it can be invested in job creation, expansion and real economic growth. the american people waited 65 days for the president's budget. they deserve more than stimulus and taxes. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition?

the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, it's now been 829 days since i arrived in congress and the republican leadership has not allowed a single vote on serious legislation to address our unemployment crisis. mr. speaker, i'm devastated. and my american people are devastated. ms. wilson: unemployment is depriving people of health care, of higher education and even of food and shelter. does this sound like a civilized nation? mr. speaker, the american society of civil engineers gave the u.s. a failing grade for infrastructure. we have no shortage of shovel-ready public projects that could put people to work. but this congress is unwilling to act. mr. speaker, our mantra should be jobs, jobs, jobs. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house, revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the president's budget proposal reportedly would cap the amount of money people can save in individual retirement accounts. this is a very bad idea. more than 1/3 of people age 55 and older are not saving for their retirement. mr. messer: 3/4 have not save -- or have saved much less than they will need to retire comfortably. we should be encouraging people to save. we need tone courage people to take more -- we need to encourage people to take more responsibility for their future well-being instead of discouraging sound financial planning. we need to incentivize self-reliance instead of government dependence. this proposal fails on all these fronts. rest assured, mr. speaker, the

white house has said that the savings cap will allow, quote, substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement savings, end quote. my constituents don't need the president deciding what is reasonable for them in their retirement. they don't need him deciding anything else for them either. we need sensible reform. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to address the sequester. many of those in this house have been telling their constituents that the sequester doesn't make any difference. nothing's really changed. but that simply is not true. for example, a cut to the federal aviation administration

budget will result in the furloughing of most of f.a.a. a's 47,000 -- f.a.a.'s 47,000 day ees for at least one per pay period through the end of the fiscal year. even those employees who provide safety-critical services like systems specialists and aviation safety inspectors will be subject to the furlough. as much as 10% of the f.a.a.'s work flow could be furloughed per day. cyte -- mr. cartwright: last week i visited the executive director of the wyoming county head start in pennsylvania. an agency which serves 1,000 students and has a waiting list of 7,000 -- 700 already. it will have to accept 49 fewer students because of the 5.2%

sequester cut. and i yield back, thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? the gentleman from florida is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i'm here to congratulate a team that captivated the nation with style, swagger, heart and class. i'm talking about four letters that few people have ever heard of until just march. fgcu. put on the map by their men's basketball team. as a representative and servant of southwest florida, i am so proud to have florida gulf coast university in my backyard. our home now known as dunk city. mr. radel: the men's basketball team and the university itself have only been around for a few years. heck, the players are actually orlando than the school itself -- older than the school itself. this is only fgcu's second year of eligibility and in their second year, went all the way

to the sweet 16, busting brackets, knocking down threes and representing dunk city with a total of 148 dunks this year. i'm proud to represent dunk city. i'm proud of our young team, our young team and we all look forward to another stunning season next year. i yield my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? he gentlelady from california. >> mr. speaker, we need to focus on fostering middle class prosperity and i feel investing in job training and education is the best way to do that. we recently had an opportunity to revamp the work force investment act. however, the consolidation approach that was take within that bill was counterproductive. mrs. davis: that legislation could have been a bipartisan effort. instead it has gone to the senate to die.

so i propose, instead of belittling federal employees, attacking unions and repealing environmental protections, why don't we focus on working together across the aisle and doing what we can to equip people with the skills and the education they need to fill the job openings that are out there? well, that might sound warm and fuzzy, but that is what americans want us to do. my constituents have told me again and again, let's focus on practical solutions to the problems people are facing. not political ideology. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? the gentleman ask for unanimous consent? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. yesterday dylan quick, a 20-year-old student at lone star college in texas, went on a rampage with a knife hurting more than a dozen people. he told police he fant sized

since elementary school about stabbing people to death. tucson's shooter jared lock in her has told his psychologist that he wished he had been taking his anti-psychotic medication. if he had been, lock in her, who has schizophrenia, says the tucson shooting might not have happened. mr. murphy: a psychiatrist treating james holmes told campus police a month before the colorado theater attack that holmes had homicidal thoughts and was a danger to the public. holmes also exhibited signs of skets friendia -- schizophrenia. those with mental illness are generally more likely to be the victims rather than perpetrators of violence but those one treated mental illness are at increased risk of violent behavior. 10% of all homicides are committed by individuals with schizophrenia, bipolar disorder and other psychotic illnesses. when will we acknowledge that it's not just what's in the killer's hand that makes him dangerous, be it fist, knife or gun, but what is in his mind? we must take off the blinders and acknowledge the importance of diagnosis of mental illness and severe mental illness. let's fix our mental illness

system. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> tonight a city i know well, my mother grew up there, my grandfather was the editor of the valley pioneer newspaper. i went toll meantry school there. and i coached youth soccer there for years. americans first came there in 1850 when leo and mary jane norris purchased property there. the name came from a native american sheep herder in the area named ramon. for many years agriculture was key part of sandra moan's economy. mr. swalwell: suburban development began there, modern sandra moan emerged and the population took off. it's grown from about 4,000 people in 1960 to over 70,000 today. it's the fourth largest city in

the county and it's the location of the headquarters of 24-hour fitness, chevy lon rand -- chevron and the west coast headquarters of at&t and both of its high schools, california high school and daugherty valley high school, were ranked as being in the top 200 california high schools. these are just a few examples of the highly educated, hardworking folks who live in sand ramon and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from minnesota seek recognition? the gentlelady from minnesota is recognized for one minute. mrs. bachmann: mr. speaker, if it is one thing the people of minnesota understand, it's hocky. that's why i'm so excited to be able to be here today to congratulate the st. cloud saint university men's hockey team, they're making history. never before in their history have they advanced to the frozen four and i'm here to congratulate them for the first time in the program's history.

it's taken talent, it's taken teamwork, it's taken dedication and the men on this team have shown it all. and i know i speak for all the people back home in st. cloud when i say, we are extremely proud of these young men and what they've already accomplished. this cinderella story is going to take place tomorrow evening. it has captivated the community. we can't wait to cheer them on when they take on the frozen four opponent. congratulations, good luck, go huskies, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentlelady from hawaii seek recognition? the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. hanabusa: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, we're back from a two-week recess in the district. everyone must have been told or seen the impacts of the sequester. when the sequester went into effect a little over a month ago, people did not see its

immediate impact. now it's different. many of them and us are hoping that the continuing resolution will take care of the sequester, but it did not. now many of them and us are hoping that the president's budget, unlike the ryan budget, the republican study caucus, or the minority budget in the senate, the sequester in place, that he will repeal the sequester. we know for hospitals like those at home that have large number of medicare patients, 2% cut to medicare is devastating. we know our friends who are still struggling with the recovery from hurricane sandy will be affected by the $1 billion cuts to fema. and our federal employees, the furloughs that cover sequester will affect not only them, their families, but other local economies. we need to recognize that slashing with sequester is not the answer. but also know that we need to reduce our deficit sensibly. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, the president released his february, 2014, budget proposal this morning and now for the first time in over four years the house and the senate and the president all have submitted budget blueprints showing their priorities for getting our nation's finances back in good standing. mr. yoder: in the house our budget balances within 10 years by slowing the growth of government, responsibly and carefully reforming federal spending while strengthening and defending social security and the house budget pays down the national debt to zero within our lifetime. just 12 weeks ago taxes went up on every american. yet unfortunately the president's plan raises taxes again on americans while increasing spending, growing the size of government and never, ever balancing. mr. speaker, the american people want balance in congress, they want a balanced budget. as we go forward, let's do our

jobs and control spending. let's balance our own books and let's stop the constant push for higher taxes on the american people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: members are reminded not to traffic the well while other members are speaked. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? do you ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, is that correct? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i rise to set the record straight here with regard to social security and medicare. first of all, neither one of them are responsible for the debt and the current fiscal crises that we find ourselves facing. mr. nolan: neither of them are entitlements. they're earned benefits. people started paying for the very first day, the very first hour they ever went to work and they have ever right to expect those benefits. thirdly, there are some

long-term problems with both and they should and need to be fixed but they can be done clearly without reducing the benefits. and let me remind all of us that nothing is done more in this country to lift more people out of poverty than social security and nothing has done more to add more life and more years to life than medicare. mr. president, my fellow members, we must stand up for social security and medicare and protect those benefits going forward. thank you. i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. without objection. and for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. latham: i thank the speaker. this morning was a remarkable time. the president, even though it's 65 days late, came out with a budget today. and it's interesting to note

that it's about $600 billion of new taxes after we've just had $60 billion tax increase on this economy, with the health care bill another $1.2 trillion of new taxes and fees. his budget proposal increases the size of government 50% over the next 10 years. mr. speaker, i've been home for the last couple weeks talking to constituents, and what they tell me is the fact that they want a balanced budget. the president's budget never gets to balance. our budget does. they want to balance the budget. they want us to get control of spending in washington because they know how it affects themselves, their families and the future of this country. this spending coupled with all of the new regulations, the health care mandates coming down on small businesses, they are stopping job growth. we have to get some common sense in this house. thank you, mr. speaker.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky seek recognition? mr. yarmuth: request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. yarmuth: thank you, mr. speaker. sequestration has been in effect for 41 days and already it is hurting american families. just outside my district at for the knox, more than -- fort knox, more than 4,000 civilian employees face furloughs because of these cuts in spending. a constituent of mine whose husband is a military technician for the kentucky national guard says her family will lose close to 20% of their income because of furloughs. he's one of at least 460 technicians in my district who will be furloughed. i talked to a school principal who is forced to lay off special education teachers because of sequestration. i met with local social services organizations who say they worry it will eliminate entire government programs. and officials at the university of louisville are worried that cuts to their research will interrupt life-saving medical

advancements. mr. speaker, sequestration was a threat, not a policy. that's why i voted against it. it now is clear that the real threat of sequestration is the middle-class families who can least afford another recession. congress should enact a budget that eliminates sequestration and spares even more mare families the pain of this ill-advised austerity. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, 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 inute. >> mr. speaker, we've all heard the statement of a day late and a dollar short. well, the president is now two months late with his budget and billions of dollars short. mr. tipton: it's clear this president wants to balance the increase of government on the backs of the american people. he believes that government needs the resources more than

hardworking americans. we put forward a budget to be able to protect our senior citizens, to be able to build for the future for our children. the real approach when we're talking about balance is to have a budget that truly balances. this administration continues to grow government, continues to waste the hardworking dollars of the american taxpayer. let's stand up and put politics aside and stand up for the people of this country and put forward a budget that will truly put america back to work. with that i yield back, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for one minute. mr. veasy: mr. speaker, i rise today about the urgent need to create jobs and grow our economy, an issue that should be our number one focus right now. we are nearly a month and a half into the sequester which has imposed painful cuts to defense, transportation and

education and is hurting our economy. i'm disappointed the house republican leadership chose the path of the sequester rather than working with house democrats to stop these needless across-the-board cuts. i'm also disappointed that house republicans have chosen the politics of brinksmanship and government shutdowns rather than negotiate a compromise with democrats. we must stop politicizing every function of government from the debt ceiling to the budget. creating jobs and strengthening our economy starts with the private sector and government working together to ensure confidence and investment across the country. i encourage all of my colleagues to come together and focus on jobs. let's work on legislation that helps our constituents obtain jobs and grows our economy. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky recognition? >> 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. . rogers: mr. speaker,

prescription drug abuse is killing more people in this country than car wrecks. it's hard to believe. but it's sneaked upon us. in my district, 10 years ago we started an organization called unite. unlawful narcotics, investigation, treatment, education, a holeistic approach, and it works. -- holistic approach, and it works. we put in jail over 4,000 pushers. we have counselors in schools. we have clubs in schools to entertain qung people on nice things to do and the like. drug courts in every county. it works but the problem persists. last week i had the great honor and pleasure of helping host in orlando, florida a drug summit on prescription drug abuse. almost 1,000 people from 49 states and several foreign countries focusing on the

problem. that's the second year we've done that. second straight year. mayor bloomberg was there. the head of the c.d.c., the head of f.d.a., the head of all sorts of the federal organizations and we're determined to help wipe out this biggest killer in this country. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from the virgin islands seek recognition? mrs. christensen: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. mrs. christensen: thank you, mr. speaker. when the horses line up in churchill downs for the running of the kentucky derby next month, all eyes on the u.s. virgin islands will be on young kevin, a jockey from my home island of st. croix, who will be riding the horse, golden sense. we're all proud of kevin who attended central high school. kevin always wanted to be a jockey and grew up in the sport, riding horses on our beaches and country roads, challenging anyone he could to a race. before he was recruited by

other virgin islanders who race, he was known as a talent to watch. he proved himself riding on the west coast, in particular, at emerald downs in seattle, washington, before his historic win at the santa anita derby. kevin became the first african-american to win the santa anita derby. last fall, he was the first african-american jockey to win $1 million race in louisiana's delta jackpot. if he wins the kentucky derby, next month he will become the first african-american to do so since 1902. kevin's family and his friends in the virgin islands will be cheering wildly on the first saturday in may. i congratulate his mother and his father. we're all proud of this young man and his accomplishments and wish him god speed in this and all of his future endeavors. i yield back the balance of my time yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back.

for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? request permission to revise and extend and unanimous consent? the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. bishop: mr. speaker, you can't spend more money than you bring in and that's a fairly simple concept, isn't it? but apparently not for democrats who are in the administration in washington. under president obama we had four years of government spending, each year spending over $1 trillion more than we took in. that kind of spending is not only irresponsible. it's dangerous. it drives up the national debt, hurts families, neighbors and our friends. the time to rein in washington spending is now. a concept so obvious it has become a cliche. house republicans understand this. that's why we passed a responsible budget that keeps our taxes low and balances our spending. that's more money in your family's pocket. the president is going to introduce a budget that doesn't balance and tries to raise taxes. again, house republicans saw the way forward, a way forward

to foster a healthier economy and help create jobs. it's time for the president to get serious about this issue as well. i yield back, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from utah seek recognition? mr. bishop: mr. speaker, by the direction of the committee on rules, i call up house resolution 140 and ask for its immediate consideration. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the resolution. the clerk: house calendar number 14, house resolution 140. resolved, that at any time after the adoption of this resolution the speaker may, pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 18, declare the house resolved into the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of the bill h.r. 678, to authorize all bureau of reclamation conduit

facilities for hydropower development under federal reclamation law, and for other purposes. the first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. all points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. general debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources. after general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. the bill shall be considered as read. all points of order against provisions in the bill are waived. no amendment to the bill shall be in order except, one, those received for printing in the portion of the congressional record designated for that purpose in clause 8 of rule 18 dated at least one day before the day of consideration of the amendment and two, pro forma amendments for the purpose of debate. each amendment so received may be offered only by the member who caused it to be printed or a designee and shall be considered as read if printed. at the conclusion of

consideration of the bill for amendment the committee shall rise and report the bill to the house with such amendments as may have been adopted. the previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or ithout instructions. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized for one hour. mr. bishop: mr. speaker, for the purposes of debate only, i yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlelady from new york, ms. slaughter, pending which i yield myself such time as i may consume. during the consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, and the gentleman is recognized. mr. bishop: this rule provides for consideration of h.r. 678, the bureau of reclamation small conduit hydropower development and rural jobs act and provides for one hour of general debate equally divide and controlled

by the chair and ranking minority member of the committee on natural resources. it makes in order all amendments which were preprinted in the congressional record and which otherwise complies with the rules of the house. so this modified open rule is a very fair and it's a generous rule and will provide for a balanced and open debate on the merits of this particular bill. mr. speaker, i'm also pleased to stand before the house and support this rule as well as the underlying legislation, h.r. 678, which is the long title i gave earlier. i appreciate the hard work of the bill's chief sponsor, the gentleman from colorado, mr. tipton, as well as the chairman of the natural resources committee, the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, and of the subcommittee of jurisdiction, mr. mcclintock of california, for allowing this bill to move forward from the committee and continuing the natural resources committee's record under chairman hastings' leadership of furthering several important pieces of legislation which if enacted will greatly improve our nation's energy policies and provide a responsible balanced

approach to further domestic energy development. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: good afternoon, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from utah for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. and yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. slaughter: thank you, mr. speaker. last friday we received the news that the economy had only added 88,000 jobs in the month of march. the percentage of unemployed americans dropped but that is almost entirely because thousands of workers have given up looking for jobs at all. this slowdown is a warning to congress but we won't take it, i feel sure, since we pretty much ignored it. unless this majority reverses the spending cuts contained in the sequester, the health of our economy is only getting worse. months ago economists were warning that the sequester will stall out our economy and lead to job loss. and as we could see by the march data, their predictions

are beginning to come true. with economic warning bells beginning to toll, one would expect congress to make job creation our number one priority. but one would certainly be wrong because we haven't done that at all. and unfortunately such expectations don't even come close. net of working on ledge -- instead of working on legislation to grow our economy and to create some good-paying jobs, we are wasting valuable time discussing yet another bill that went nowhere in the last congress and i predict will go nowhere in this one as well. but we seem to have the time to waste. the majority has decided that erasing environmental regulations for hydropower companies is a beltre use of time than putting -- is a better use of time than putting americans back to work and help families pay their bills. furthermore, the bill before us today is a solution in search of a problem that does not exist. despite the rhetoric of the majority, small conduit hydropower projects are rarely delayed because of

environmental regulations. in fact, from 2006 to 2010, 13 exemptions of completed in less than a year and in 2011 there were nine exemptions that were granted in an average of 40 days. in addition, changes within the last year have made the process even easier for hydropower developers. under the new regulations by the bureau of reclamation, all a developer has to do to avoid a full environmental assessment is to get a simple 1 1/2-page form filled out with 15 boxes to check yes or no. that is certainly not a burdensome regulation. all they have to do is check the box yes or no, indicate the project is not in an especially sensitive area. most small conduit hydropower projects will easily pass this test because the reclamation sites are already developed. but despite what you may hear, there is little evidence that there's even a problem with

hydropower regulation that needs to be solved. contained within today's legislation is a proposal to clarify the lines of authority between the bureau of reclamation and the federal energy regulation commission. this is a worthwhile effort that would receive bipartisan support and we made that very clear. in standing alone, though, this proposal could pass on suspension within a matter of minutes. that would of course leave us with nothing to do here today. so here we are, during the debate in the national resources committee, the majority was given the opportunity to agree to the noncontroversial and bipartisan rts of the legislation and drop the attacks on the environmental safeguards. unfortunately the majority has once again rejected this chance for compromise and chose a partisan path. and as a result we are here spending time debating another partisan bill that will not pass the senate and turning our

backs on pressing economic needs of this country. i've said many times on the floor during rules debates that the cbs news had estimated it cost $24 million a week to run the congress of the united states and it is past embarrassing that we do so little work. but for millions of americans, the luxury of the time that we take here is something they cannot afford. i urge my colleagues to vote no on the underlying legislation so we can get back to the task of growing our economy, repealing the sequester and creating american jobs. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from new york reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. bishop: mr. speaker, i also ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. bishop: at this time i wish to recognize the sponsor of this piece of legislation, to explain why it is so necessary that we do this, even though on

paper it seems like this problem is solved. the gentleman from colorado, mr. tipton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized -- mr. bishop: for as much time as he may consume. the speaker pro tempore: is recognized for as much time as he wishes to consume. mr. tipton: i thank chairman bishop for yielding and, mr. chairman, thank you for this time. i think it's worthy of note when we're talking about job creation in this country, i just traveled through the third congressional district of colorado, visiting with people rom pueblo, durango, cortes, steamboat. one of the greatest challenges that they face is regulations coming out of washington when it comes to job creation. the fact of the matter is, we're spending $1,750,000,000,000 per year out of businesses to be able to comply with government mandates. is it a sensible approach, seansble approach to be able to look -- a sensible approach to be able to look at regulations that simply don't work and are

inhibitting job creation and our ability to achieve the most carb--- carbon-free, environmentally friendly regulation we can have? that's hydropower. that is a sensible approach. mr. chairman, i rise today to encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to vote in favor of house resolution 140, for an open discussion on how we're going to be able to work together, to be able to promote clean, renewable, hydropower development in rural america and create a much-needed -- and create much-needed jobs in the process. at a time when our country needs to be able to focus on domestic energy production and job creation, hydropower can play a critical role in providing clean, renewable energy, while expanding job opportunities in some of our hardest-hit rural communities. hydropower is the cheapest and cleanest source of electricity available through modern technology. it's the highest source of

noncarbon-emitting energy in the world and accounts for approximately 75% of the united states' total renewable electricity generation. making it the leading renewable energy resource power. hydropower can produce up to 1,400 megawatts of power in colorado alone. let's put this in perspective. this is the equivalent of the power produced by the original design of the glen canyon dam. just out of colorado, not including the rest of the western united states. increased conduit hydropower serves a number of purposes. it produces renewable and emissions-free energy. energy that can be used to pump water or electricity into the grid. it can offset diesel-generated pumps, it can generate revenue for hydropower developer to be abled to pay for aging -- to be able to pay for aging infrastructure costs and modernization. and it can create local jobs and generate revenue for the federal government.

as it stands, federal regulations hinder this development on federal projects and subject job creators to unnecessary requirements which can render small hydropower projects economically unfeasible. for this reason, i introduced h.r. 678, the bureau of reclamation small conduit hydropower development and rural jobs act. this altogether ration -- this authorizes to clear up multiagency confusion and duplicative processes and reduces the regulatory costs associated with hydropower development. h.r. 678 is passed by the national resources committee with bipartisan support, would eliminate the requirement of unnecessary environmental analysis for the projects on manmade facilities which already underwent a full environmental review at the time of their construction or when undergoing rehabilitation. the bill covers small hydropower generators installed on manmade pipes, ditches and

canals and renewable energy development promoted by the bill in no way, in no way impacts the natural environment. by streamlining this process, we finally make these small conduit hydropower projects financially feasible. and unleash private investment and clean energy. this is energy that will reduce costs for rate payers and increase tax revenue for the treasury, while putting people back to work. now, i understand that some of my friends on the other side have reservations about this provision. and as i've made clear in the past, i'm open to being able to work with my colleagues to be able to address their concerns with the nepa provisions. however, failure to address the xisting regulatory uncertainty will negate one of the primary purposes of the bill and will ensure that the vision by the bill remains in limbo. i'm optimistic that discussing this issue openly will allay

any concerns members may have and enable us to arrive at a solution that streamlines the project approval process and reduces costs. i'm proud to have the support of the family farm alliance, national water resources association and the american public power association, among others. i think the broad support of this bill has been seen most directly impacted in terms of indicating how close we are to making renewable energy development a reality. i look forward to an open discussion on the merits of the bill and while i believe i will speak -- the merits for themselves, i thank chairman and ranking member for our opportunity to be able to present this. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado yields back his time. the gentleman from utah reserves. the gentlelady from new york is recognized. ms. slaughter: mr. speaker, i have no requests for time and i will reserve the balance of my time until my colleague is ready to close. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from utah, mr.

bishop. mr. bishop: thank you, mr. chairman. let me take a moment just to give my impression on this particular bill. then i'll be ready to close at that time. mr. speaker, this is a bipartisan bill which had a bipartisan vote in this body last time and a bipartisan vote in the committee, sent to the senate where an err rant senator was able to -- errant senator was able to hold the process up. fortunately there's a new chairman in the committee in the senate from the west who clearly understands the value and the significance of hydroelectrical power. so i think that everyone in this body, on both sides of the aisle, can agree that our nation is in great need of energy -- of more energy. if we want to create jobs, real jobs, private sector jobs, there has to be a strong energy component to our ability to do that. our nation has tremendous amounts of energy, whether locked away domestically in forms of oil and gas and high b.t.u. reserves, but too often

special interest groups and layers of bureaucracy have kept us from becoming more energy self-efficient with these areas and we're now seeing and results every time somebody tries to pay an electric bill. this administration seems to be dragging its feet on energy development, of everything from the keystone pipeline to development of public lands. but there is also another source of energy that is presently being unused and can be put to good use without negatively impacting the environment. the energy resource is what we're addressing here in this particular bill. this bill deals with electricity that can be generated from hydro. renewable energy resource that is very clean and helpful to the environment. the thing is that numerous witnesses testified this year and last year that there is an uncertainty on the nepa costs which throw these projects into limbo and often render projects financial unfeasible and stifle

private investment, far and beyond what has been able to be done. that is stifling what could be done to produce self-sufficiency in energy production. one witness from arizona simply testified in 2011 that it would cost them $20,000 to install this generator that would create energy in a federal canal. yet the nepa analysis would cost them $50,000 to check the boxes and do that simple paperwork as we heard about. the environmental paperwork in this case is almost three times the cost of the capital that you would put into the project. and it all is redundant since the nepa analysis was done in the first place for the entire canal. this is a second project put in the same canal that has already gone through this process. it's a manmade canal. witnesses have testified this year that despite the bureau of reclamation's claim of