you know you have the right to remain silent. you don't have to remain for a miranda warning -- to wait for a miranda warning for that to take place. what it does do is make sure that you are following the regular process so when you get a conviction it will not be overturned. host: ast: on c-span3 this morning, hearing on extremism in chechnya. we will carry that live starting at numeral 10:30 on c-span3. there is information about that. newer, new jersey -- sorry, new york. democrats line. caller: you guys make it hard every time someone talks and wants to ask another question. you are on the judicial committee, and you use the word letting illegals become

citizens. if you are a republican and against that, you would never vote for a republican. these people are never going to be allowed to vote. so you have millions of people coming in you will make legal after they came into this country illegally. i don't know both we understand what the word "illegally" means anymore. apple today inc. -- in commerce are more worried about their party then about the american people. that is how i see it. i used to be a supervisor and i was in judicial so the word " illegal" to me meant breaking the law. almost all people agree with that. i cannot wait to hear your answer. , first of all, you are right, there is too much concern over how politics affects your party and not as much focus on how -- whether it is good or bad policy.

i think you are right on that. but different people are here without documentation for a lot of different ways, some across the border, and arrived without documentation. others came legally and just overstay their visas. they are here without documentation. there is some question as to whether or not being here without documentation is even against the law. it may be deported, but or may not be a crime depending on how you got here. the present system just doesn't work. that is why the comprehensive immigration reform is being considered. 11 million, 12 million people were here without documentation. we need to do something. i think the majority now have concluded that the only rational thing to do is to have a credible path to citizenship,

and then crack down on border with more border patrol, have limits on who can come in and and eliminate the incentive for coming by making sure any time somebody gets a job, their status is verified. you just cannot pick and choose who you are going to verify. you have to either cover everybody or nobody. i think the consensus is closely approaching the fact that if you just verify any , make sure they are here legally. if you're here illegally, your -- you are not going to be able to get a job. host: will the house bill on immigration be able to satisfy what has been released in the senate, are these the details produced in the senate think what is being discussed in the house and senate are very comparable. obviously, there will be differences. there will be amendments and

suggestions and we will work through. but i think the fundamental question about whether it is a credible path to citizenship for people who are here and that the limit to people coming in and then the verification of employment, i think those are the key elements. host: mechanicsville, virginia, independent line. this is stuart. hello. caller: hello, how are you doing? host: good, go ahead. caller: number one, i would like to know why when you talk about sequester cuts and having this go and affect national security and everything else across the board, why did congress balk when they tried to give the -- heent the option could pick and choose where the cuts would be. they reneged -- they didn't do that. number two, budget cuts are not really cuts. they are cuts in future spending, ok? that is just the way it is. we know that.

i'll tell you one place that is not going to be cut, fairfax county, virginia, the highest are cap income in the nation. -- highest per capita income in the nation. host: what is your third point? caller: the only thing bipartisan and congress is that they cover each other's butts. guest: i will skip the last one. there is not enough bipartisan action in congress, i agree with that. the option blocking and picking and choosing what gets cut, if you cut $1.2 trillion out of the budget with across the board, mindless cuts, you will have a lot of cuts that should not have been done, some cuts that could have been done less painfully. if you do $1.2 trillion in cuts, you will have -- you will reconsider your havoc in ability to do a lot of things across the board. we will vote today on whether or not the department of

transportation can move somebody around to make sure that air traffic controllers don't get cut. but it is interesting that there is no -- it is not paid for trade you have to get the money from somewhere else. it will be interesting to see what else gets cut. .ou stop building roads that can help pay for air traffic controllers, but, i mean, you cannot cut $1.2 trillion that significant problems. -- without significant problems. and as you suggested, a lot of the cuts are not lower levels of spending, but lower level of increase. that's true. with inflation, it will cost more next year to provide exactly the same services you are providing today. there is what is called the present services baseline. what will it cost next year to do the same thing that you are doing this year? usually because of population increases and inflation, it

will cost more. if you don't, but that number, you will have to reduce the services that you are providing. are spending more money, you still have to reduce the services. when you have a baseline that includes present services, you're right, that is an increase and you come up with a lower number, but they will not be able to get the exact same services they got the year before. we do not have -- we are not in a budget crisis where we cannot pay our bills. just a couple of weeks ago, congress passed the $3.9 trillion tax extension. $3.9 trillion. inquire -- the entire sequester is $1.2 trillion. trillion dollar tax extension, we would not have to do any cuts.

we are talking about cuts in social security and medicare. social security, the cost of living increases, quote -- so- called chained cpi. that is a little over $100 billion from social security -- $.1 trillion. $3.9 trillion tax cuts -- we went so far in the ditch that we were actually talking about -- cutting social security to pay for it. they're talking about base closings. $2 billion savings. $2 billion. not $20 billion, not $200 billion, not $2 trillion. $2 billion. -- i mean,n dollars you lose that rounding off the decimal point before. i think that if we had taken the budget as a whole and look at it, and then made the decisions rather than saying, let's cut

taxes and see what we will do, or what we will do with the sequester, if we had done it all at once, it would've been a much better product and we would've decided whether we wanted $3.9 trillion tax cuts. if we know that we are talking about cutting social security and headstart and air traffic control anything else, if you cut the taxes, it -- maybe we would've made a different decision. i'm convinced we would have made a different decision if we knew how we would pay for this tax cut before we voted for it. we are where we are. the only rational thing to do with the sequester, in my judgment, is due at some of the revenues that we pat -- is to get some of the revenues we passed a $2.9 trillion and put them back up on the table and that is what the president's budget does. a significant portion of how we get out of the sequester his new revenues. unfortunately, there are other cuts in their i am not -- but to move forward we have to have more revenues on the table.

do you think the house will restore the air traffic controllers? guest: yeah. you are not going to take it out of road maintenance? you can do that for a couple of years and then you have potholes all over the place. virginia was running a situation where the maintenance budget was eating up the entire transportation budget and there's nothing for new construction. everybody's driving around after politan washington, d.c. and knows that you need new construction. host: representative bobby scott, democrat of virginia, thanks for joining us today. guest: thank you. host: coming up, our weekly " america by the numbers" segment. we are looking at homeownership and we will have that discussion in a few moments. this is from yesterday. you may remember that president obama, after his appearance in the morning at the bush library, traveled to wait -- waco, texas

for a memorial for the victims of the fertilizer plant explosion. here is what he had to say. [video clip] for this state and our country, these have been trying and difficult days. we gather in texas to mourn the brave men who went through fire, and all those who have been taken from us. we remain mindful of our fellow americans inflated states to the north to indoor the high waters. we pray for those in boston who have been tested, and the wounded whose greatest tests still lie ahead. -- while the eyes of the world may have been fixed on places far away, our hearts have also been here in your time of tribulation.

and even amidst such sorrow in god'sh pain, we recognize abundance. we give thanks for the courage and the compassion and incredible grace of the people of west. we are grateful for the mayor and all those who shown such leadership during this tragedy, and to the families and neighbors grappling with unbearable loss, we are here to say you are not alone, you are not forgotten. we may not all live here in texas, but we are neighbors, two. -- neighbors, too.

[applause] we are americans, too, and we stand week you and we will not forget and we will be there even after the cameras leave and after the attention turns elsewhere. your country will remain ever ready to help you recover and rebuild and reclaim your community. [applause] , "washington journal" continues. host: ranting and homeownership is our topic. joining us is arthur cresce she. also running is for the discussion, rolf pendall -- also joining us for the discussion rolf pendall. both of you gentlemen, welcome. the u.s. important for government to look at renting and homeownership as an issue?

guest: when we collect these data, they are very important for policymakers and those who pass legislation in congress to look at the affordability of housing and the kind of data we from the american community survey or housing survey, collecting the kind of information that really helps to understand what is happening with the housing market. that is one of the most , provide things we do statistics that help make the decision. host: once lawmakers have those statistics, when you get these snapshots of what is going on and who was renting and how much they pay for rent, what does that mean for the government as follows paul -- as far as policymaking is concerned? guest: we are in interesting times as far as housing policy. we went through a severe housing crash after a housing bubble and those things are related to the finance system. congress is considering what to

do about, for example, the government-sponsored enterprises, family -- fannie and freddie, but also, it is looking and an economy that is not performing that well. in terms of how we should set policy for housing and also housing and its impact on the economy, what can we do to encourage the housing recovery as part of a broader economic recovery? those are important for congress and the executive branch to think about. our gentlemen will be with us for the remainder of time and if you have questions about homeownership in the united states, we have put -- we have divided our lines regionally. give us a call.

taking a look at the numbers, when you look at the current percent of owner households, 64.6%. when you look at renter households, 35.4%. guest: among occupied units, either you are a renter or an owner. when we get to the slide dealing with times, it is a mirror image of each other. as one is decreasing, another is increasing. as a decreased over time, the percent of lenders increased as well. 2-1 as far as homeowners -- guest: that is what is right now. . regarding the percent of renter households, an increase in the percent of renter households between 2009 and 2011. host: because why? guest: decline in the

homeownership rate. people need to live someplace. toy more than likely move renting rather than owning. happens, people moving from homeownership to renting, what does that do for the economy, as you were speaking about? guest: it is unclear what the impact of that is on the economy and what the impact of the economy is on that. it is partly people moving from homeownership to renting but also the new generation. this is the largest generation in the united states that is periodsver a five-year that the baby boom was at that time, and these folks are moving into housing as fast as they might but they're still moving into housing from their parents houses and college dorms and so on. that is another big piece of the increase in renting. it is the creation of new households who tend more often,

generally, it to rent went economic times are good, and now the economic times are not so good. is it the mentality -- four, it used to be you should own a home, that was the starting point. people now say it is safer to rent, but also people cannot afford to own homes and a lot of the time they don't have the credit record that allows them under -- a sort of tighter money situation to get a mortgage. if you look at the polling data about what people want, most people still say that they intend to be homeowners at some point and aspire to that. the percent of renter households that you were speaking about increased from 34.1% in 2009 to 35.4% in 2011 could give us a sense of the background. based on the

survey where we are comparing periods, we were looking at a time when homeownership was higher. and this brief we had that was released last week really kind of shows you that there has been a shift, and as we might see in later slides, this pervades all throughout various metropolitan areas. you see this everywhere. the percent of renter households going up pretty much across the board, almost every place you see. how our friends doing as far as what people have to shell out month by month? guest: that is part of the data cresce collected and he should answer that question. with: if you look at -- the percent, you can see in this

particular slide, for the nation as a whole, the rent -- we define rent here as including utilities and fuel. sometimes it is not included in contract rents. you take this concept of rent and you see that nationwide, actually, the rent measure went down between 2009 and 2011, when you adjust for inflation. when you look at the metropolitan areas, what you find is that less than half of the metropolitan areas experience a decrease in the rent. it is no surprise, really. host: because of the constitution of people? guest: and the economy is doing well in the washington area. with the decline in

natural gas prices, so many people heat with natural gas and it could be that the stability in rent is because of falling utility rises -- falling utility rices. increasing demand for rental housing and dropping rates, which we will talk about in a minute -- at the same time you have rising rents. the fundamental's are out of fark for the long-term. -- are out of whack for the long-term. guest: the vacancy rate for 2000 was a .4%. in 2011.ed increasing demand unless supply. for our "america by the numbers" segment. let's start with wayne in harrisburg, pennsylvania. caller: how you doing? i'm renting, right?

i am in a conflict with 500 families. -- a complex with 500 families. and with housing assistance, right, they have certain apartments they have on the forlex and there was rent the people. i am on social security disability. i am trying to get my rent decreased, but every time i call up, they said they are not doing it. is there anyway i could find out if that is the truth? guest: well, the united states does provide housing assistance in various forms to low income people who rent. the housing choice vouchers sometimes goes to tenants and sometimes gets attached to a housing unit. withent report recommendations by the , thetisan policy center

bipartisan housing commission, found that the need for subsidy for people with low incomes far outstripped the available money. who would be the people that one would call with the subsidy as one wants to get one that they closed their waiting lists. there are sometimes tens of thousands of people in big cities. watch for affordable housing for people who are paying too much for the rent. host: florida. and, good morning. caller: how are you today? host: fine. caller: i'm a little nervous, pedro. thank you for bringing these people to the table. host: ann, let me ask if you've rent or own. caller: i am a homeowner, i'm in my 50s, i live in florida, my

husband and i have been in the same own for 20 years. we refinanced last year with our credit union. we reduced the payments on our own but we had an increase in insurance and an increase in our homeowner association dues and we had an incredible amount of that we arerties sustaining, mowing the yard and taking care of their pools and doing all kinds of things with renters that are getting special consideration because they are in programs. host: your question or comment? caller: here is my question -- we have some abandoned homes in our communities that have been sitting dormant for over two years. and my question is, is there any relief for actual people who are current on their homeownership and they have very good credit, and i would also like to say

that i am on disability, although i take care of my grandson every three days, and i have all three grown-up children who are college-level. we are thinking that at this stage in our lives, we are worn- out and now we're taking care of people and we want our neighborhood to be the way it was. ok.: see if our guests can comment on it. guest: a lot of communities and states with higher rates of foreclosure are suffering this way, so my heart goes out to you and your neighbors and other folks in the situation of having abandoned houses and homes you need to take care of .ith the homeowner association that burden is falling dramatically in california and florida, but also in michigan and arizona and nevada. those states are called san

states but it is not limited to that. the federal government after the housing crash enacted a series of measures called neighborhood stabilization program that provided and directed funds to local communities so they could use them creatively in the way they wanted to to address foreclosures in neighborhoods. the funding has been programmed and it is pretty well spread out. the rest of the housing market appears to be on its way to recovery, but florida is still deeply, deeply affected in the wake of the crash. this sort of goes to the idea that the national numbers might look at one thing but the metro numbers are going to look different, and we need national policy and responses that are flexible and responsive enough so that people in florida get the kind of help they need in recovery just as people in

washington, dc are getting other kinds of assistance and programs. the: a map provided by census bureau -- by the way, you can find this on our website as well -- says the change and percentage of renters spending 35% or more of their household income on gross rent -- three categories. increase, then the degrees. -- than the decrease. what is a mean for the person paying rent? guest: this particular map shows the outlines of all of our metropolitan areas. you look at the bottom right corner, you see in the legend of bear talking about rent -- the legend we are talking about right. -- rent. spending 35% or more of their gross income on rent. in terms of this being the rent burden -- if they have 35% or the, we term that is being

rent burden. you see the change in rent burden between 2009 and 2011, and the purple indicates those metropolitan areas where rent burden has increased, become less affordable between 2009 and 2011. the grade changes are at the metro areas where there is decrease in the rent, more affordable. the interesting thing about this map -- for saw, the areas that have the increase in rent burden. there is no regional concentration of these particular areas. they are spread all around. they are all different regions of the country. host: you stress that especially towards the west. when you say "rent burden," is that the flat rate -- guest: everything including utilities. gross rent is the so-called contract rent, and anything else you might at first very suitably used or feel you might need on top of that. essentially, it is capturing all

those rental costs in one number. -- $1000, $1500? i read in wyoming it was like $500 a month. guest: obviously there is a huge difference in what you pay for rent in the hottest real estate markets compared with those -- with slow markets -- houston versus new york city, for example. maybe you have numbers about that, too. yes, actually, we do. i'm not sure if we have the figures here, but the rents about $1400 or higher, on average, versus places like the midwest or other areas. you have quite a range of rents .eing charged in terms of rent burden, takever the rent is, we

it as a present of household incomes. call is fromt alameda, california. linda, hello. caller: good morning. it is interesting you bring up this topic of renting versus homeownership. i happen to see a newscast this morning where they had a professional real estate oppression -- professionals who said -- wanted to compare renting versus owning. i'm surprised that after all of these problems with people buying first-time homes and not being able to afford their houses, having to give them out, this real estate professional. rent versus their mortgage and had not included any of the other costs associated with homeownership's -- with homeownership, such as

property tax, prepares, maintenance, other things that really, you wind up after you but your own finding out that you have these other associated costs. host: linda, are you one owner, then? caller: i am an owner. host: what kind of repairs have you done? has the economy given you the ability to do that? caller: it is not the repairs and improvements, it is more the property tax. when you add the property tax, the true cost, the monthly cost, could be -- if my mortgage was $2500, it could be more that -- more like $3200 a month. if you are comparing rent and , andage, that is one thing you at the property tax insurance and all the other

costs of living at home. that's right, and i think that when dr. crash -- dr. cresce was speaking about not just rent but rent and utilities, what the bureau for a long time has tried to recover out of the housing costs in a bundle and try to present information about each of the pieces in the bundle -- with athe counterpart measure of rent burden -- we have a similar measure for homeowners, and we take the monthly owner costs that people andrt in various surveys we divide that with household income. there is a probable measure where you are looking at what proportion of households are spending 35% or more of their income on housing related costs.

we show all of these different mortgage,roperty tax, all the things included. host: gallup put out a poll that takes a look of the reasons people decide to own their own homes, financial reasons specifically. surprising that you hear this nowadays with the economy, but -- guest: if you have a good credit record and you can get a mortgage, and a lot of markets that is absolutely right to it is a better deal because interest rates are still really housing prices are low, although they started to edge up in some places. you end up living in a pretty good place at a pretty low cost compared to renting, or even though the cost may be going up in some markets, for people who

can afford to, or are already in their own house, the kind of rent they would have to pay to get into something similar would be pretty high. the other element of this that i ,hink is on the financial side the houses seemed like a place where a good trade-off was putting your money into a bank , at least it is a forced savings plan so that every month you are putting your mortgage and even if you don't build equity and you are making a payment and you are not having .o put the money into rent it is going into your health account, and even if it loses value there is something there later. host: 12% say they believe in owning and have always owned and 10% said they did not want to pay rent, seven percent said it was for the family and to have a sense of our home. andrew is up next from flemington, new jersey. good morning.

caller: good morning. i am 83 years old and i want to give you a brief consensus of what i think. during the depression, families were big, and like my father, who worked in a factory making $.67 an hour, and our rent was 11 dollars a month. that cycle change when the second world war broke out and there was a housing shortage. during the depression, there were big families with a limited amount of rental area, so people lived within their houses and everything was kind of stable. after the war there was a big room with thousand projects. they were tremendous. -- with the housing projects. they were tremendous. this is a little different. after 19:50 am i the house --

after 1950, i build the house and i was there for 50 years. , today, people move around the country so much that they almost cannot afford to say, well, i am going to stay here for another 10 or 15 years or 20 years, because boom and bust is all over the country. people are kind of shaky, but that is why we had a financial crisis, because those banks were given loans out to people who were unstable, because they were moving around. well, i won't go into that. host: ok, caller, we will leave it there. it tracks mobility, also -- guest: yes, naturally, will we find, when we look at the mobility of homeowners, people own their home versus renting, the proportion of people moving is higher, certainly for

renters that for owners. can show that an show that over time -- i don't know even- i think that he mobility of homeowners has declined over the last several years come even though it is lower once again on the renter mobility. oft: one of the pieces information is about new homes, new houses, the percentage of housing units by metropolitan, from 2009 to 2011. are these new home constructions we're talking about? these are homes built since 2005. what we're looking at is the change between 2009 and 2011. -- asrry as part of the part of the american survey. what it shows is that the present -- the percent of new homes of all homes. what it shows here, if you look

at the color code on the bottom right-hand corner and you take a look at the top most -- the darkest color, dark blue, 10% more, you see that those are the areas with the highest concentrations. unlike the previous slide, where it was spread throughout the country, you can see the presentations here -- the concentrations here in the south on the west and consider the migration over the last number of decades. these are big growth areas. it is no surprise that these should be the same areas where you have concentrations of neurons -- of newer homes. by contrast, in the northeast and great lakes areas, there is a greater concentration problems unless of newer homes. -- and less of newer homes. these folks are spending less time on home improvement and things like that. host: home improvement will be part of the discussion. we're talking about renting in homeownership with our guest.

maybe you have questions about what is going on statistically with information from the census bureau. trace is up next. long beach, california. caller: hi, good morning. i am a loan officer in long beach, and i have a question for you. what percentage of purchases of single-family homes under owner-0 are actually occupied relative to investors, hedge funds, investment groups? i will take my answer off air. guest: i don't have a specific number of that, but it is clear that in a lot of markets, investors have come in and have bought either one of the time or even in bulk. a lot of the houses for sale,

either as short sales or on the houses don't even come onto the market before they go into the hands of investors. this is happening for a few reasons. it is happening was clearly in the housing markets like southern california, phoenix, an atlanta, where investors see that there is immediate and long-term advantage to having homes as an asset. they feel they can probably sell the homes eventually. but no eventually the rent -- -- they arerents able to recoup investment even for the next two years. havee think that investors helped to stabilize the floor of the housing market in these areas and may even be making it more difficult for households to -- moderate income households, to get into the

housing market even if they have good credit records, which is part of the pressure on the rental housing market. host: gainesville, florida. hello. caller: thank you for taking my call. of the chairperson housing authority in alachua county and i am on the affordable housing advisory committee and i work on a lot of property issues. i've seen where local governments are failing to provide affordable housing. we have had mandates in losses 19 85 to create and the concentrate -- that is very important -- poverty. local governments are failing -- behest ofm, at the special interest like the homebuilders association and the realtors association -- and as the government and hud and congress are cutting back housing authority funds and maybe forcing us to drop people off of section eight or raise rents incredibly dumb the private sector has got to step ,n and -- racer it's incredibly

the private sector is have got to have it -- has had to step in. color, thank you. guest: many local governments in the united states to all they can to accommodate their share of their regions or their state's need for housing generally. metro area needs rental housing, affordable rental housing. in many communities there is a strong enough opposition among residents and elected officials that you just don't see any -- enough affordable rental housing being built. and in a lot of cases none being built at all. if you have single-family houses that are foreclosed on and are being bought by investors and you have the right kinds of assistance for low income people with and without housing assistance, they are often in better neighborhoods

than the ones they can find in the cities. they have good schools, parks and so on. in some cases it may represent an opportunity to make workers on this goal, providing broader choice for households who are often young households, sometimes disabled, sometimes elderly. they cannot hook up with a housing unit that they can afford to rent. this points out the value of data from a source like the american communities survey, where we think -- where we can calculate these rent burden measures down to the local level. people begin to see the who set policy or work on affordable housing issues can be looking at tracking this from year to year from local areas. i think it shows the value of the data we collect for public policy. host: and the information when it comes to the rent burden households, 2009 22011, looking at the metro area.

this information is available to .org.t c-span what attitude do they take when it comes to putting more housing out there and more availability? the private industry works like any other private industry. if they don't make the rate of profit the rest of the market is making, they go out of business and investment won't flow into those areas. there is a lot to be had with the homebuilding industry does and what apartment builders do. that logic is something -- sometimes driven by wallace e on tax the financial system and so on. -- by policy on tax and the financial system and so on. rather than looking at the builders and saying why aren't you building more, you have to go to the decisions. i mentioned local government, and they make it harder to build that kind of housing. approvals and attachments are hard to get. that means more costs. but if you cannot finance a project, you will not be able to

make an application to a local government to build it. host: you own a home anywhere have to make improvements. take a look at what kinds of -- fill ins and cost the blank for us as to what people i doing with their homes. guest: this is based on the american housing survey. it provides a real wealth of information on our nation's housing stock, it asks questions that are not asked anywhere else. show on hometa improvements -- overall, about 359 billion dollars spent by homeowners on home improvements between 2000 and 2011. if you look at this chart, if you just count the projects that people did over this time, the projects and for living -- projects involving flowing and paddling are the greatest. but that you look on the last

-- left aside, roofing dominates at $44 billion. if you ever had a roof replaced, as i did several years ago, it was when the most expensive projects. you see the kitchen remodels are about $36 billion falling behind. on averagehe math, the kitchen remodels are more expensive than roofing types of expenses as well. these tell interesting things about what is happening from home improvement. host: let's hear from carol in riverside, telephonic. caller: good morning. i was wondering, first of all, if president obama still had that special ordained committee havelp homeowners who may had a complaint or a -- or a lo.

my problem being is that i am in riverside, california, and i applied to keep your home california, who i read had billions of dollars from the government before this sequester baloney stuff. -- i telling everybody was in a slump for a while because i've been in my home for three years and my rent is $533 a month. i am barely able to catch up. my documents.l initially i was accepted, and then finally they told me that i they denied me because didn't make deposits on some of my rental income. and thanket down and he scrapedin-law, together some money and help me save my house, and now i am ok.

but i want to know, is this committee of president obama's still in force? would that help me, or should i get a lawyer? being that they have millions of dollars, i think they have a response ability to the wiki my home. host: caller, thank you. don't so all -- so i know about the committee the collar is referring to, but there are a lot of local groups that have been working hard throughout the united states and have mobilized to help individual homeowners as well as neighborhoods in communities. what i would suggest generally if you are in a position where you are in a house and are relying on family and maybe family members are stretched, two, you in touch with some of these local groups, housing counselors, which many communities have, community development organizations, your local chapter of habitat for humanity. you can get in touch with these folks and reach out to these folks and local government.

a lot ofime local vernments, local department of community development, will be able to help you -- help get you connected to both services for the moment and into programs that can help. host: george from new york, hello. guest -- caller: i'm just wondering, is there a program that president obama has just to reduce the interest rate -- i own a co-op apartment here in new york city. i'm wondering, is there a program to reduce a six percent interest rate down lower that i can continue to live here? i am a retired person and might income is -- is there a program that the president has? i understand that there was some kind of program to keep people in their homes, but i always get turned down because it is a co-op in new york city made -- in new york city. is there something for an old

guy like me? iq. i will listen off the air. -- thank you. i will listen off the air. guest: on the federal program side, i am really not sure. most of the eight has been aimed at people -- most of the eight has been aimed at people who are either behind on their payments or they are making your payments but they are paying for -- paying for a house that was worth a lot more than it is now. the focus has been largely on people who don't have enough home equity to the good credit -- i should many people cannot speak to how much the caller hase compared, but the co-op value in new york city may be somewhat more stable or even rising market situation than, say, many areas in florida are.

, the the circumstances answer would sometimes be to work with the private sector to see if there is something the private sector can do. host: a thought from a viewer. let's go to kentucky. caller: yes, thanks for taking my call. pridenk when the phrase " of ownership" is used, a service is performed to the country. we step pride in our integrity and value -- we should have pride in our integrity and value. if you want to talk about ownership versus leasing or renting them a that is fine for economic reasons. but i think it is a marketing gimmick thought up by the real estate industry and i really don't think it should ever be used. thank you. i will hang up. host: caller? it is i think -- important to make an investment decision, or a decision about

whether to rent or to own, in a way that is a little less emotional and quite a bit more bottom-line. is this the right decision for me and my family now? is a good decision given where we are in the life course and also in the country? is a good idea for a 22-year- in a declining housing market to put a lot of money into buying a house gecko probably not. a a good idea -- into buying house? probably not. is it a good idea for 39 euros -- 39-year-old to buy a house in a rising market? it will vary by person, but i agree with the color that making these decisions on an emotional basis, based on excitement or emotional attachment, may get some people into serious trouble and may lead them to

stay in their house for longer than theshould. rather than making a different ki odecision. host: julia, hello. caller: thank you for taking my call. i am an individual who works for an international company for 10 ,ears, and was getting married and we ended up buying our first home, which we are in now. unfortunately, when i had my first child, i got a serious back injury, which cause me to lose my job. five years now and hopefully will return to the workforce. but in the meantime, i was the head of household and i could not pay the mortgage. chase, which i never wanted my mortgage with to begin with, they bought my mortgage. they couldn't work with me at all. so finally, two years into it, got into the program doing restoring stability. i come to find out that i had to be restoring stability and it went through and chase excepted but chase overcharged the story

stability about $100 a month over what my mortgage actually was. was that was completed, now they are charging a higher market and have refused to do any type of refi whatsoever. refiwill -- they will not my mortgage, saying i missing paperwork come over and over and over again. i don't understand why i have everything requested for me and -- my responsibility, chase has fallen short on every single turn. i am still in a situation where monthly, we have to make a decision whether we see the household -- we have the household groceries or pay the mortgage. i have, oh, absolutely no help from our lawmakers here in ohio, and i don't know what to do now. i don't know what to do at this point so that i can get chase to work with me so that we have manageable mortgage. host: appreciate the call. guest: in some areas, most of

the united states, there are housing counseling firms or orgazations that receive funding from the federal government to work with homeowners. you think about counseling and sometimes you think, well, they will just talk to me so i don't feel as bad. actually, these counselors do a lot more than that. they will often intervene with the mortgage servicer, and between a homeowner who is having trouble with the thegage and the servicer, servicer provides much better terms -- researched by the urban institute has demonstrated that household to receive the counseling services to the national foreclosure mortgage counseling service and neighbor works were more likely to -- were less likely to default, have lower payments, and once

re-red, were less likely to default on mortgages. it is important to take advantage of services, because it is not like going to a psychological counselor. as long as you can help you with the mediator and the organization, and you cannot cope anymore with the difficulty of dealing with the servicers. host: information from the census bureau says that the current percentage of households -- owner households is 64 point six percent. percentage of renter households is 35.4%. renter households toreased from 34.1% in 2009 35.4% in 2011. the number of vacant units declined from 8.4% in 2009 to 7.4% in 2011.

what is important to know related to the numbers? what is think interesting, getting back to this rent burden thing, one of the things we found looking at this, where, for instance, in the metropolitan areas, 17 out of them experienced an increase in the rent burden. about half of those actually expense to decrease in the rent. this interesting thing with the burden is going up at the rent is going down. what we found is that for most of these areas, the same areas experienced a decrease in the household income. that is another factor involved with this. it declined over the same time, leading to this paradox. host: one more call. virginia -- idaho. good morning. -- the reason i am

calling is because i am a senior. i have never had a problem with with it anyway, shape, or form. now i was i was given a notice to vacate my premises, and the reason is that i am an unhappy person. how they came to that conclusion, i don't know. but i talked to karen housing -- to fair housing. i'm just wanting to know -- i got my belongings packed in my living room, but nowhere to go. i put in applications for different places. hopefully they call so i can move in. right now i am in the standstill. i am receiving more letters from the management that handles the landlord's paperwork and i am there and i don't know what to do. ?ow can be helped who do i turn to?

where do i go from here? it has really taken a toll on my health. other than that, i'm a very healthy person. i am a happy person. i don't know how they came to this conclusion. guest: well, it is tragic that people can lose their housing at a moments notice. i think there is been a lot of focus on the instability that was caused for homeowners in the last -- in the crash. that is very serious, it is very real. renters are really more at the mercy of their landlords for the most part in the united states. caller'solor -- comments really speak to to that. in areas where they are -- where there are really take vacancy rates, if there are enough people who want those apartments to replace current ,enants, landlords may say well, the particular tenant said they don't want them here

anymore and we could get higher rent, perhaps, and for whatever reason. it is too bad. dore are some states that better at protecting tenants than others. host: it is our weekly "america by the numbers," and we look at renting and homeownership. e census bureau, and rolfe pendall of the urban institute is joining this discussion. both of you gentlemen, thank you very much. now we go to the house of representatives. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] [captioning performed by the national captioning institute] the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., april 26, 2013. i hereby appoint the honorable randy m. hultgren to act as speaker pro tempore on this day. signed, john a. boehner, speaker of the house of representatives. the speaker pro tempore: the prayer will be offered by our chaplain, father conroy.

chaplain conroy: let us pray. gracious god, we give you thanks for giving us another day. you have blessed us with all good gifts and with thankful hearts we express our gratitude. you have created us with opportunities to share together in respect and affection and to be faithful in the responsibilities we have been given. in this moment of prayer, please grant to the members of this people's house the gifts of wisdom and discernment that in their words and actions they will do justice, love with mercy and walk humbly with you. as the members return to their districts, may their constituents meet them with respect, honesty and if need be challenge that will serve as an encouragement to the work they do for our nation.

done be for is your honor and glory. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1 the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota rise? >> mr. speaker, pursuant to clause 1 of rule 1, i demand a vote on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the journal stands approved. mr. paulsen: mr. speaker, i object to the vote on the grounds that a quorum is not present pourdpourd. -- point guard point guard. -- and i make a point of a order that a quorum is not present. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on the question will be postponed. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentleman from california, mr. mcclintock. mr. mcclintock: i pledge

allegiance to the flag of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to five requests of one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for whats th entleman from california rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. mcclintock: mr. speaker, on wednesday, the democratic whip charged that the full faith and credit act places america's credit at risk of default. as churchill said, it would not be possible to state the opposite of the truth with greater precision. quite the contrary, this measure guarantees that whatever political storms are raging in washington, america's debt will always be paid in full and on time. i would remind him that if the

full faith and credit of the united states is ever compromised, all programs are jeopardized. this bill protects the public credit so that the public credit can protect seniors and disabled veterans and all of our other obligations. no one wants to see a stalemate that would delay any payment. that would be unprecedented, disruptive and dangerous. but the lasting damage would be to imperil our nation's credit. this bill simply ensures that even in that worst-case scenario that will never happen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute, please. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> i rise today to talk about bob michael, a man who served central illinois in this chamber for close to four decades and who continues to be

a longtime friend of my family and a role model to so many. mrs. bustos: he graduated from -- after coming home, bob michel became involved in public service and ended up serving 38 years in this house of representatives. eventually rising to the house minority leader. i'm a democrat and congressman michel happens to be a republican but i'm proud to say he earned a reputation as someone who worked across the aisle striving to find common sense, bipartisan solutions to the issues of the day. congressman michel celebrated his 90th birthday last month and he continues to be an inspiration to all who are interested in working together to get results than trying to score cheap political shots. central illinois has a long tradition of public servants who made a career of reaching

political lines. former republican congressman, ray lahood of peoria, has worked across the aisle to improve the nation's roads, bridges, raillines as secretary of transportation under the obama administration. mr. speaker, i hope that all members of this body will join me in pledging to work together, to put the people we represent first, and i'd like to wish congressman michel a happy 90th birthday. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what reason does the gentleman rom colorado rise? without objection. mr. coffman: mr. speaker, lieutenant colonel donald hood passed away on december 30, 2012. he served our nation with distinction first on active duty in the united states army

and later in the army reserve. lieutenant colonel hood was with the 82nd airborne division in north carolina where he became the first optometrist in the united states army. from 1970 to 1972, lieutenant colonel hood served in southeast asia during the war in vietnam as the army chief of eye services at the diplomatic medical mission in bank cock, thailand. -- in bangcock. he served as chief of optometry for the 502 united states army hospital in aurora, colorado, until his retirement in 1990. lieutenant colonel hood is survived by his wife, patricia, his daughter, chelsea russell, his son and granddaughter. mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon seek recognition? >> to address the house for one

minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman requests unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. defazio: later today, the house will vote to restore funding to the nation's air traffic control system. to better protect the traveling public and to restore, you know, order to a vital sector of our economy by shifting unused funds. two lessons hopefully now learned. across-the-board budget cuts are abysmally stupid. the kind of program that's vital to the health, safety and the economy and what about this unused money over here? oh, we can't move that. so we took care of that. second, there's some here who believe the federal government doesn't need to and should not invest in facilitating the movement of goods and freight and people in this country. it should devolve to the states. this is an abject lesson of how

vital these programsthe nation's airspace. and next year when the highway trust fund goes below zero and we cut spending by $50 billion on highway and transit we'll have another crisis. let's hope we don't see a million layoffs before we fix that one. fix that one before it happens. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. paulsen: well, mr. speaker, i rise to celebrate national park week. our national parks are truly one of america's greatest natural resources, drawing nearly 279 visitors and families who go to camp, hike, fish and explore each year. minnesota, my home state, is home to several national parks as well with lakes, rivers and waterways. in just a few years, our national parks will celebrate their 100th birthday. in preparation for this

centennial, i introduced h.r. 627 that will allow the u.s. mint to mint a commerative coin to help our national parks and our national park foundation. the bill has strong bipartisan support and it is one more way we can provide additional resources for our national parks. protecting and preserving these beautiful spaces, our national parks, monuments and civil war battlefields are important to keep for future generations. and our national park week is a perfect time to reignite this interest for individual community efforts to ensure our national parks remain and retain their place as the most beautiful in the world. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to announce a new achievement in mathematics. we learned about square roots in middle scoot. n the 15th century, they formed the science and

engineering which are applied for practical uses like the design of airplane wings. mr. mcnerney: in the 1990's, one had the square roots of differential operators in the development of quantum mechanics which is the basis of high-tech science. matrix factorization, which is important physics, was discovered by david. this month, daniel, a post doc at the mathematical sciences research institute announced new ways of linking matrix factorizations together which will have numerous applications. his work was funded by the national science foundation and illustrates the importance of our nation's continuing investment in science, technology, engineering and mathematics, research and education. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. smith: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. smith: mr. speaker, last

poll a random telephone was conducted in the 21st district of texas. here are the results. 88% feel that the border should be secured before other immigration reforms take effect. 84% favor a system that would require employers to hire legal workers. 96% think that the federal government should balance its budget. and 85% believe the american people are taxed too much. these are sincerely held views hardworking, law-abiding, tax-paying, good americans. congress would do well to heed their advice. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. holt: mr. speaker, i rise oday as a member of the safe

climate caucus. this past week the concentration of carbon dioxide passed 400 parts per million. i -- this level of carbon dioxide has never seen in human history. this has not been achieved for millions of years. i also say a milestone in human history because it is human activity. the way we produce and use energy that is responsible for this high concentration. and it is of historic importance because, as scientists have made clear, this great concentration of greenhouse gas is changing our very climate in ways that are dangerous and costly in dollars and lives. if we fail to change our ways, fail to change how we generate and use energy, then we will face worse and worse, blistering wildfires, withering droughts, flooding events,

superhurricanes. as the earth goes barreling past 400 parts per million of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, let's take action now. this year, this congress to address climate change. let's show that this is a turning point, not just a marker of inaction and environmental degradation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from mississippi seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, eight months from now the affordable care act's individual mandate will begin to punish americans with a tax simply because they refuse to purchase health care. mr. palazzo: it sets a dangerous new precedent. if congress has the power to tax our decision to not purpose health insurance, what else can a future congress tax? the supreme court has opened pandora's box and allowed future congresses to tax americans for failing to purchase any number of

conceivable goods or services. basically, whatever congress deems necessary. that's why i introduced house joint resolution 28, the right to refuse amendment, which would effectively reverse the mandate taxes and permanently prevent congress from forcing americans to choose between a purchase and a tax. the amendment is short and simple. congress shall make no law that imposes a tax on a failure to purchase goods or services. if my colleagues believe the court got it wrong and if they believe in limited government, then i ask my colleagues to support house joint resolution 28. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will receive a message. the messenger: mr. speaker, a message from the senate. the secretary: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: madam secretary. the secretary: i have been directed by the senate to inform the house that the senate has passed s. 853, cited as the reducing flight delay act of 2013, in which the concurrence of the house is requested. .

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? >> to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlelady seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute? mrs. maloney: yes, i do. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mrs. maloney: in the wake of the terrorist attack on the boston marathon and learning that their next target was times square in new york city, i hope my colleagues who oppose gun safety laws will reconsider. because we have learned that tamerlan, the terrorist, was on the terror watch list for 18 months. and we have learned many of our colleagues say that someone should have done something, something to prevent the terrorist from killing. but strangely making the tamerlans of the terrorists undergo background checks on internet or at gun shows to buy a gun is not one of them.

the pro-gun lobby insists that the next terrorist should still be able to buy all the assault weapons they want and all the 100-round magazines they need. no problems. no back grouped check necessary. and -- background check necessary. and the next tamerlan think they are absolutely right. but 90e ers -- 90% of americans disagree, and i hope my colleagues will reconsider gun safety legislation. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? mr. hastings: i ask unanimous consent that all members have i five legislative days to revise and extend and include extraneous material material. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to house resolution 178 and rule 18, the chair declares the house of the whole house on student for further consideration of h.r. 527, would the gentleman from, mr. hultgren, kindly take the chair.

the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 527, which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to amend the helium act to complete the privatization of the federal helium reserve in a competitive market fashion that ensures stability in the helium markets while protecting the interest of american taxpayers and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole rose on thursday, april 25, 2013, all time for general debate had expired. pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. in lou of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on natural resources, printed in the bill, it shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of rules committee print 113-9. that amendment in the nature of

a substitute shall be considered as read. no amendment to that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in house report 113-47. each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. it is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in house report 113-47. for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> i have an amendment at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 1 printed in house report number 113-47, offered by mr. collins of georgia. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 17 , the gentleman from georgia, mr. collins, and a member opposed each will control five minutes.

the chair recognizes the gentleman from georgia. mr. collins: thank you, mr. chair. i offer this amendment to ensure any excess funds as a result of this bipartisan bill are used to he reduce the annual federal budget deficit. i am pleased my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have proposed a commonsense bill that speaks to the heart of the free market system. the congressional budget office estimates as a result of this bill $340 million will be returned to the federal government. this amendment ensures that every penny of savings will go toward deficit reduction, furthering the goal of this house to create jobs and encourage economic growth. this body has made significant strides in putting our country back on its path to fiscal prosperity. paffling a budget that seeks to balance in 10 years is no small achievement. there is still more we can do. this bill is one example of savings we can achieve by allowing innovation and private industry to do what it does best. the underlying bill completes the privatization of the federal helium reserve in a competitive market fashion, respecting hard-earned taxpayer dollars

while ensuring the stability of the helium market. as we have seen in the current market, innovation thrives when government gets out of the way. by applying free market principles, this will will further cutting-enl research and development, while bringing transparent and responsibility for the spending of taxpayer dollars. g.e. energy, i.b.m., and others. i thank the gentleman from washington, and the gentleman from massachusetts for their leadership on this issue. this legislation is a perfect example of how good policy knows no party line. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. mr. hastings: would the gentleman yield? i thank the gentleman for bringing this amendment to the floor an i intend to support it with our fiscal situation in this country, this is a good addition to the amendment. i thank the gentleman for bringing it forward. >> i yield. >> the amendment which affirms

-- reiterates language that is in the underlying bill and we have no objection to it on the minority side. i ablaud the gentleman for bringing it forward. >> thank you. mr. collins: at this point i am pleased to yield two minutes to my friend from georgia, co-sponsor of this amendment, mr. scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. scott: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the gentleman from georgia for allowing me a few minutes to speak on this issue. i rise today in support of the collins-scott amendment which requires that any funds received from the sale of helium will be used to pay down our country's debt. i'm sure many of oufer colleagues would agree when i say our country's deficit someone of the top problems we face. in fact, if we continue on this path, by the time my 13-year-old son is a freshman in college, this country will be paying more interest on the debt than we spend on national defense.

i understand this problem cannot be solved with one swift move, however if we are not able to make reasonable changes to policies and allow additional revenue to reduce our debt, our children and grandchildren will not be given the chance to continue this country's greatness. due to the importance of protecting our children and grandchildren, we should support this amendment. it puts us one step closer to addressing our country's biggest problem. for this reason i ask my colleagues to support this amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from georgia is recognized. mr. collins: this is a commonsense amendment that will only enhance the benefits achieved by the underlying bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. does any member wish to claim the five minutes in opposition? seeing none, the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from georgia, mr. collins. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.

he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 2 printed in house report 113-47. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i seek to offer an amendment. the clerk: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2, printed in house report number 113-47, offered by mr. dent of pennsylvania. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 178, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. dent, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. dent: thank you, mr. speaker. our amendment ensures the continued supply of helium for end users while requiring the b.l.m., bureau of land management, to honor existing contracts for supply and delivery of this vital resource. most important the amendment protects american manufacturers who use helium from the uncertainty of an ininterrupted supply. my colleagues have repeatedly

stated that helium has been given away by b.l.m. at rock bottom prices, to a monopoly of refiners. respectfully the current price structure says otherwise. since b.l.m. began selling off helium under this program, during most years far less than the helium was purchased. in fact during some years no helium was purchased at all. if the price were really so low, the available helium be purchased? instead the b.l.m. price set for the purchase of crude helium has been higher than the crude price purchased anywhere in the united states. b.l.m. can pose higher prices for helium right now. over the past three years b.l.m. has raised its prices by 30%. when the congress in 199 decided to privatize helium, a few companies stepped up and spent tens of millions of dollars to build a helium enrichment unit which the b.l.m.

operates, highly unusual public-private partnership. if there are a few companies that refine helium today, it is because they and not their competitors chose to make investments that have been fitted our nation's manufacturers and society generally. our amendment does not seek to preserve a so-called monopoly over federal helium supply. instead our amendment seeks to uphold these existing contract and property rights while ensuring continuing supply of real yum for domestic -- helium for domestic manufacturers. this amendment is strongly supported, they are deeply concerned about the effect of the remedies fashioned in h.r. 527 on the stability of the existing market for helium, particularly as they affect the meet contractual obligations. with that i reserve the balance of my time. he chair: reserve. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? mr. hastings: i rise to claim

time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: i oppose this amendment while it is being sold as an attempt to protect contract and property rights, it does none of these things because there are no rights violated by this bill. the amendment actually undermines the free market competition that's embodied in 527 that will ensure a fairer return taxpayers on the helium that's in the repository. this amendment seeks to guarantee a special carve out for primary three companies and thus block competition. for over a decade, these three companies have profited from helium handouts at low market prices that were granted to them by the b.l.m. all all of that eppeds in october of these years. these handouts end because that is is when the contracts say when the money is paid back, that the federal government has invested, these contracts end.

this amendment does not protect existing contracts because they expire in october. what the amendment actually would do is revise the expiring special handouts of these three companies. the amendment would shut down competition from other bidders who may be willing to bid for a higher price of the helium. i have a letter from three companies who jointly express strong opposition because it would prevent them in the future from bidding on this helium. to be clear there is no helium distributors or manufacturers of helium who are advocating for this amendment. it is just the three refiners. to repeat h.r. 527 does not alter or end existing contracts. in the actual causes of these contracts -- clauses of these contracts, it's specifically stated the contracts are contingent on b.l.m. continuing to have operation to run the reserves. that ends in october. b.l.m. has been selling helium at below market prices, i'll

point that out later, but what really this amendment attempts to do is to end what should not be done. with that i reserve my time. mr. dent: i yield one minute to my colleague from new york, mr. higgins. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. higgins: i thank my friend and colleague for yielding. mr. chairman, i'd like to thank congressman charlie dent and congresswoman esty for working together on this bipartisan amendment. our amendment would ensure that the bureau of land management implements free market reforms while respecting its contractual obligations. high-tech manufacturing, m.r.i.'s, nuclear power reactors, and a host of critical national defense applications requires helium. congress asks american companies to partner with the federal government to build the infrastructure needed to extract, store, and refine and bring to market this valuable

domestic resource. now that the infrastructure is built out, this legislation seeks to break our contracts with those partners. this is unfair and unnecessary. our amendment simply affirms that the bureau of land management will honor its existing contracts and are set forth -- that are set forth to expire over the next couple years. i urge a yes vote on this bipartisan amendment to demonstrate that we can reform our helium policy in a way that respects the agreements in contracts we have made. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. dent: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? mr. hastings: i'm very pleased to yield two minutes to a co-sponsor of h.r. 527, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. holt: mr. chairman, i thank the chairman of the committee, again, for bringing forward this bipartisan legislation. . i rise in strong opposition to this amendment. the helium reserve is rapidly

declining. at the current drawdown rate in five or six or seven years, the helium in the reserve will be largely depleted. the amendment by mr. dent seeks to run out the clock on this legislation to allow the existing regime to stand and prevent the reforms that h.r. 527 would bring forward. h.r. 527 does not alter or end the contracts that the refiners have with the bureau of land management. but if we do nothing and allow the gentleman's amendment to go forward, under existing law and terms of those contracts, the entire helium program would come to an end in october of 2013. this year. the amendment would delay the implementation of the reforms in the bill until 2018 at which time it's likely there will be

little helium left to distribute to anyone, to the hospitals and doctors who need it, to the electronics manufacturers who need it, to the scientists and researchers who need it. this amendment would gut the bipartisan reforms of the bill and it should be defeated. although the gentleman claims he wants to prevent disruption in the supply by preventing this legislation, he would, in fact, do just that. he would create disruptions in the supply. i thank the gentleman for yielding. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized. mr. dent: at this time i'd like to yield one minute to the gentlelady from connecticut, ms. esty. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. esty: thank you, mr. chairman. i'd like to thank representative dent and representative higgins for working on this bipartisan amendment. our amendment is rather straightforward. it's about fairness and honoring contracts. at a time in our nation's

istory when we are examining public-private partnerships to create jobs, what kind of to al would we be sending the private sector even if you have a valid contract that expires in 2015, the federal government will throw it out and change the rules. we can pass a bill to prevent a global helium shortage by allowing the remainder of the helium -- from the reserve to be sold, but we should not ignore the contracts that b.l.m. has already signed. i urge a yes vote on this bipartisan amendment. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman yields back. mr. dent: can i ask how much time i have left? the chair: the gentleman from pennsylvania has 45 seconds remaining. the gentleman from washington as 1 1/4 minutes remaining. mr. hastings: i have the right to close, mr. chairman. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from washington reserves his time. the gentleman from pennsylvania. is recognized. mr. dent: thank you, mr.

speaker. i just want to address a few issues. my friend, mr. holt, said that these reservoirs will be depleted. i agree. the issue is who's going to invest in enrichment and refining facility at a reservoir that will be depleted in five years? no one will make that investment. the prices of helium has gone up. b.l.m. can charge more. our amendment is about respecting pre-existing contracts, protecting property rights while ensuring helium to marn manufacturers. without this amendment there will be a disruption in the supply of helium. they won't able to release that helium. they will be under no obligation to release it. that will be the greatest threat. this amendment protects the helium supply. as mentioned, m.r.i.'s, fiber optists, american manufacturing needs this. i say support this amendment. vote for a helium supply and, again, vote to support our welders. thank you. the chair: the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. hastings: i yield myself

the balance of the time. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: the assertion is made that this violates contracts. mr. chairman, i want to be very specific. current law says when the debt is paid back, the contracts that are entered into expire. so therefore, we're not violating any contracts because on october 1 that will happen. secondly, the pricing mechanism -- and i pointed out in my opening remarks that the three refiners are the ones in a are benefiting and this chart shows how. this is what they are playing is the blue line. that's the bottom line. the red line is the market price. the yellow in between is what the refiners are accruing as far as profits are concerned. we're just simply saying the market ought to dictate who gets that benefit and that's precisely what 527, h.r. 527 does. so this amendment simply prolong the yellow, if you will, on this chart longer and only three companies benefit by that. i don't think that's good for the taxpayers because the taxpayers are the ones that are

failing -- are getting the low end of the deal with in a yellow line. so while i understand where the gentleman is coming from and i respect him for bringing this issue to the floor, it's good to have a debate on it, no contracts are violated under current law. i urge my colleagues to reject this amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from pennsylvania. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. the amendment is not agreed to. mr. dent: mr. speaker, on that i request a recorded vote. the chair: the gentleman equests a recorded vote. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, if you are proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from pennsylvania will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 3 printed in house report 113-47.

for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? mr. holt: amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3 printed in house report 113-47 offered by mr. holt of new jersey. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 178, the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt, and a member opposed, will each control five minutes. mr. holt: my amendment would provide an assessment of how the eventually closure of the federal helium reserve would influence the availability of this critical resource in the future. let me take just a moment to say a little bit about why this is important. helium is the second lightest gas in existence. it remains liquid, down to absolute zero. it is chemically very inert.

it is -- it can be made into a quantum superfluid that flows without any resistance at all. these are unique properties that make helium invaluable, necessary, irreplaceable for imaging in etic doctors' offices and hospitals, for fabricating electronic devices, for all sorts of research. whether it be in quantum computing or superfluids and many other areas. why is this a policy issue worthy of the u.s. congress? because this invaluable, irreplaceable element is very rare on earth. it is in fact the second most common element in the universe.

but it has long since risen up through the atmosphere of the earth and vanished into space. and small amounts of helium are created moment by moment deep in the earth through radioactive decay caught in natural gas reserves along with methane and the other things we it's rare l gas, but and it's difficult to separate. nd yet we need it. far sighted legislators, 3/4 of a century ago, began stockpiling helium. they thought it would be used for blimps. they weren't sure what else it would be used for, but they understood this had some very special properties. it was a good investment for taxpayers. it was a very good investment for taxpayers. that this stockpile was

created. now, the stockpile is running low because of decisions by congress in past years. it's important that as we make the decisions and the changes that we make with this legislation that we not -- that we fail to recognize possible future uses, possible future failure of possible the market to provide inadequate supply of helium to meet those demands. i know there is an ideology that's prevalent around here for any commodity, for any human need that the market will provide. in fact, it doesn't always, and in this case in the helium over the decades it would not have had it not been for the federal reserve. so it is important that we stop d take a look at the

implications for the future, and so my amendment would simply expand the study section that already exists in this legislation to make sure that we look at possible future uses, likely future supplies and making sure that we are prepared to have an adequate supply of this valuable resource into the future. it should be a noncontroversial amendment. i hope it will be unopposed, and i urge my colleagues to support it. thank you. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from -- for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? mr. hastings: mr. chairman, i ask unanimous consent to claim time in opposition to the amendment although i am not opposed to the amendment. the chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: thank you, mr. chairman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: i want to start by saying that the development

of ts gislation has truly been a bipartisan effort. i want to thank my colleague from new jersey who's been a leader in helping bring this legislation to the floor. one of the main goals of h.r. 527 is to stop the imminent shutdown of the federal helium program this october by establishing a new program to compete -- complete the privatization of the helium reserve. however, this action remains only a band-aid to our long-term helium supply. helium, like many other resources, is something that requires significant investment in development to bring to market. while this amendment will keep the helium in the verve, the reserve only has a handful of years. the gentleman's amendment is a question of what do we do next and that's a good question. the idea that when the reserve closes, america could be left or russia y of qatar is not the prospect we relish like being dependent on china

for rare feerls. and yet no one thinks the solution is for the government to jump back in the helium business. instead, we need to continue our focus on this issue to prevent resource scarcity that could threaten our manufacturing and national security. while i understand there have been some initial conversations, i want to make it clear that this is not the last time that the committee will focus on the issue of helium. it is my intention that the committee examine other areas where we may be able to expand helium supply or promote additional steps for conservation. the report directed to be developed in this bill will help guide our effort forward. and the gentleman's amendment will add additional important questions to help provide us a path forward. but it is up to us to act and continue to focus on what is critical national security and economic security concern secure a stable supply of helium. so i look forward to continue to work with the gentleman from new jersey as we seek these

solutions, and i think his amendment adds to that prospect. and with that i support the amendment and yield back my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from new jersey is recognized. mr. holt: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new jersey. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 4 printed in house report 113-47. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. thornberry: mr. chairman, i offer the amendment made in order under the rule. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 4 printed in house report 113-47 offered by mr. thornberry of texas. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 178, the gentleman from texas, mr. thornberry, and a member opposed, each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas.

mr. thornberry: thank you, mr. chairman. and let me first commend and express my appreciation to chairman hastings and mr. holt and others who have worked on this legislation. indeed, we have come a long way from the days when helium was essentially a government-run monopoly to this legislation which helps bring in more market forces, more competition, more free enterprise, and i think will help move toward developing more supplies of helium in the future, as was just discussed on the last amendment. it is in exactly that spirit that i offer this amendment which seeks to affirm the authority of the secretary of the interior to allow others who are not currently connected to the helium repository to connect to it and to store their helium there. . whatever costs are incurred with

allowing others to connect and to store, those cost vs. to be met by the individuals not by the taxpayer. but by doing that i think we do at least take a step towards encouraging more helium supplies to be developed. the side benefit is as these other helium supplies are stored in the repository, that helps keep the pressure up in the dome so that ultimately more helium, government helium and private helium, can be extracted. i think this is perfectly in keeping with the theme of the bill. it moves in the right direction to encourage the expansion of more helium supplies, and i hope that the members will consider it favorable. mr. holt: i yield to the chairman. mr. hastings: i thank the gentleman for bringing this amendment to the floor. he made the observation in his debate this is something we were talking about in the previous debate. we are going to have to have

more helium and market forces i believe is one way to do that. i support the amendment and i yield back. mr. thornberry: i'll be happy to yield to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. holt. mr. holt: i thank my friend from texas. i think the gentleman's agreement is a good one. it will clarify the producers of helium may connect to the federal helium serve to store helium. and by seeking to provide incentives for additional production and storage, i think his amendment will do a -- will provide a public service. i think we, as the gentleman has said, we should examine ways we can use the reserve to maximize the american supply of helium in the decades ahead. i support him in this and i urge all of my colleagues to do so. i yield back. mr. thornberry: i thank both the gentlemen. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back. does any member seek to claim the five minutes in opposition? seeing none, the question is on the amendment offered by the

gentleman from texas. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? mr. hastings: i move the committee do now rise. the the chair: the question is on the motion the committee rise. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the aye vs. t the motion is adopted. accordingly, the committee

rises. the chair: the committee of the whole on the state of the union having had under consideration h.r. 527 directs me to report that it has come to no resolution thereon. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration h.r. 527 and has come to no resolution thereon.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house a communication. the clerk: the honorable the speaker, house of representatives, sir, under clause 2-g of rule 2 of the rules of the house of representatives, i herewith designate robert reed deputy clrk to sign any and all papers and do all other acts for me under the name of the clerk of the house that he would be authorized to do by virtue of this designation. except such as are provided by statute in case of my temporary absence or disability. this designation shall remain in effect for the 113th congress or until modified by me. signed, sincerely, karen l. haas, clerk of the house.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass the the .r. 1765, to provide secretary of transportation with the flexibility to transfer

certain funds to prevent reduced operations and staffing of the federal aviation administration, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 1765, a bill to provide the secretary of transportation with the flexibility to transfer certain funds to prevent reduced operations and staffing of the federal aviation administration, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from iowa, mr. lay them, and the gentleman from -- latham, and the gentleman from arizona, mr. pasture, -- mr. pastor, each will control 20 minutes. mr. latham: i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to evise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the consideration of h.r. 1765. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. mr. latham: mr. chairman, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. latham: mr. chairman, i come today with h.r. 1765, a bill to

provide up to $253 million fr the airport improvement program, or any other account in the f.a.a., to the operations account. the purpose of this transfer authority is to restore a reliable and safe service in the commercial air traffic system by reducing our eliminating employee furlough days. i think we all agree the f.a.a. and the administration has handled the sequester poorly. the f.a.a. has negotiated in bad faith with the f.a.a. employees, the airlines, the flying public, and the congress and the administration has played shameful politics with sequestration at the cost of hardworking american families. as i have often said, this is simply no way to run a government. but the congress is stepping in to correct the problems created by the administration's inaction. we are taking this step because

of the gross mismanagement of this important function for the safety of all americans who fly and on behalf of the commerce that depends on reliable -- a reliable air system. we are taking this action to end the administration's political games that are -- threaten our passengers' rights and their safety. the fact that we are here today trying to solve this problem is a result of the sequester. i remind you that the president, and again the president brought the sequester to the table. and in an effort to avoid the arbitrary $1.2 trillion of cuts mandated by the budget control act, twice, twice the majority in this house have passed commonsense legislation that would have replaced the sequester -- sequestration with target spending cuts of an equal dollar amount. unfortunately the senate never considered either of these bills and thus the sequestration was

triggered. further this situation goes to show that we need to return to regular order and consider appropriation bis in their tirety and not rely on continuing resolutions to fund the government. under a c.r. there is no way for us to prioritize cuts or protect programs related to the safety of the american public. it also goes to show that we must have a long-term, comprehensive solution to our budget challenges, one that solves the sequester and provides sustainability and stability in the federal budget. mr. speaker, i put the administration, the secretary, the agency on alert that we are watching. we have questions and we want answers about how they're using these funds and how you're going to be managing the rest of your department. like i said at the f.a.a. hearing this last wednesday, the safety of our airspace cannot be subject to political

posturing. mr. speaker, i reserve the alance of my time. the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. grijalva: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, mr. grijalva: and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. grijalva: i would tell my dear friend, chairman latham, that we agree on one thing and this is the notion that this is not a good way to run a government. i have to remind him and remind all my colleagues at about a year and a half ago we were in this house. mr. pastor: in this chamber talking about the budget, the budget control act, as i remember. so about a year and a half ago, we had a vote. i did not support the legislation because i felt that

questration was a bad idea, but the house passed the bill, the senate passed a bill and the president signed it. so for me it's very difficult to lay blame on any one party because this was done in a bipartisan manner. it is very difficult for me to lay blame on one chamber cause both chambers passed the bill. and it's very difficult for me to blame the administration for signing it, because this was an action taken in the house, the senate and signed by the president. i thought it was a bad idea, but the majority felt it was a better idea and went forward. now, i have to tell you that was before reta

our subcommittee -- huerta was before our subcommittee this week and he detailed the cuts he had to make based on the rules and regulations of the various laws that deal with sequestration. d that is why 149 contract towers were recommended to be shut but they remain open because of a lawsuit and that is why we had the furlough of the f.a.a. air traffic controllers. , d in his testimony administrator huerta reminded us that in february of this year, a letter was sent by secretary lahood to the leadership, including myself and chairman latham, that the

sequestration was going to use problems and the efficiency of the air traffic control system because there will be a furlough of air traffic controllers in order to meet the cuts that were required by sequestration. that was done in february. in march when sequestration was invoked, f.a.a. had to then implement a plan to see what it had to do to meet the number of cuts it had to make, but not -- not to take away the safety of our air traffic control system, knowing that its efficiency will be diminished. and so today we are here bringing a fix to this

situation. furloughs have been taken. 10% of the employees are furloughed, and that has resulted to the passenger's inconvenience and delays or canceled flights. and the problem is, and i agree with my chairman, is that this solution is not a good solution because there are other agencies who have to make their cuts and are in a crisis themselves. , but when we ot come back from our district work period, there won't be another agency, another crisis that we have to start shifting money from one account to save another account. mr. speaker, the solution is a

comprehensive removal of sequestration, and that will only come about, in my belief and in my opinion if the house, with its budget, the senate th its budget, we'll conference and work out the details that needs to work out to have a comprehensive olution, not to our budget but also to sequestration. and that needs to be done in order that we're not dealing with issue by issue, crisis by crisis. and so i agree with my chairman that this is not a good way to run a government, but this morning i ask my colleagues to support this legislation, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: may i inquire as to how much time is remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa has 17 minutes remaining.

mr. latham: mr. speaker -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona has 14 1/2. mr. latham: thank you, mr. speaker. i now yield one minute to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. hudson. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for one minute. mr. hudson: thank you, mr. speaker. unfortunately for this administration the term sequestration has become synonymous with fear. i've been extremely disappointed that the f.a.a. chose to close the control towers at 147 sites including in my hometown of concord, north carolina. it was named by the government accountability office as an airport of national significance because it is the reliever airport for charlotte-douglas, which is the sixth busiest airport in the world. the decision to close these towers at a savings of $50 million is hard to understand. when you consider the fact that the f.a.a. requested $15.1 billion for fiscal year 2013

and through sequester is actually receiving $15.9 billion. an actual increase in the amount of money they said they needed to operate. i would say that their goal is to make sequester cuts as painful as possible to the american people and frankly threatens the safety. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. hudson: i'd like to request 30 more seconds. mr. latham: i'd yield the gentleman 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. hudson: thank you for your time. i conclude by saying i support this bill because it ends the political games by giving the secretary the flexibility that he needs to keep these contract towers open and so i would encourage the secretary to do that for the safety and for the economy of our local communities. i yield back the balance of my time. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes.

mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in opposition to this piece of legislation. the editorial board of the "usa today" was skeething in its assessment of where the blame for this sequester should lie. and i quote. no members of congress should be surprised at the havoc brought by the sequester. after all, they caused it. and transportation secretary ray lahood repeatedly warned them about the consequences, but flight delays are just the tip of the iceberg. as time goes on, without a big balanced deficit solution to replace the sequester, more of that iceberg will surface, more americans will be affected. while i want to end the delays for passengers in maryland and across the country, i will oppose this bill because it fails to address the whole impact of sequester. let me share just a handful of examples of how the sequester

will affect americans. education, head start, 70,000 children will be kicked out of head start. nothing in this bill deals with them. furloughs to cause delays in processing retirement for disability claims, nothing in this bill deals with them. four million fewer meals on wheels for seniors. 600,000 people dropped off w.i.c. nothing in here for them. housing, 125,000 less h.u.d. rental assistant vouchers. nothing in here for them. emergency unemployment insurance cut 11% for two million out-of-work americans. nothing in here for them. f.d.a., 2,100 fewer food safety inspectors, an 18% cut. nothing in here for them. longer waits to approve new drugs. nothing in here for them. defense and homeland security, furloughs equivalent to 1,000 fewer federal agents, f.b.i., border, etc., on the job. 1/3 of combat air units are

grounded. nothing in here for them. 89,000 agencywide furloughs in i.r.s., up to seven days, including -- may i have 30 additional seconds? mr. pastor: i yield 30 seconds. mr. hoyer: nothing in here for them. they serve 89,000 taxpayers trying to find help. we ought not to be mitigating the sequester's effect on just one segment. when children, the sick, our military and many other groups who will be impacted by this irresponsible policy are left unhelped. instead of addressing this serious -- dressing this serious wound with a small band-aid, let's get to work on a real solution, let's go to conference, let's deal with all the adverse consequences of sequester, not just those that affect the powerful air travelers of america. we ought to help them, but we ought to help everybody else as well. i yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: mr. speaker, i yield myself 30 seconds. it's fascinating what the administration that insisted on the sequestration -- mr. hoyer: if the gentleman will yield? mr. latham: the gentleman supported the sequestration as to now and come and make a statement -- mr. hoyer: if the gentleman will yield on that point for accuracy sake? apparently not. mr. latham: i yield one minute to the gentleman from new york, mr. reed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. reed: i'd like to thank the gentleman from iowa for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise today in support of the underlying bill and before i make my comments, i would just ask my colleague, a good friend of mine from maryland, we have an opportunity today to send a signal to america that we have a bicameral, senate-passed here and here we are going to address an issue that will help american citizens. let us start here on a bipartisan fashion to solve the problems for hardworking taxpayers than worry about d.c.

over those concerns of the people back home. mr. speaker, i rise in support of the underlying bill because i have heard from my constituents, in particular, the city of ithaca in upstate new york where a contract tower is going to be closed and what this bill does is it restores that funding on a commonsense basis where that contract tower, my sincere hope and belief, will be preserved and go forward. that will preserve the safety of the public and also the local economic opportunity it represents for the city of ithaca. i'm proud to stand here today because of bipartisan efforts, we worked together to solve this issue. let's pass this bill and move forward. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: mr. speaker, i yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from maryland. mr. hoyer: i thank the gentleman for yielding. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. hoyer: let me inform my friend from iowa that he absolutely misstates my mission. i did not support the

across-the-board cuts. i opposed your cut, cap and balance bill which you supported which had sequester as the alternative. the president is against sequester. the senate budget is against sequester. and you would not allow us to offer an amendment four times which would precluded sequester. not only for air travel but for those head start children, for those senior citizens, for basic biomedical research. i tell my friend, if you are going to state the facts, state them correctly and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the speaker reminds all members to address their remarks to the speaker. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. price. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from north carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. price: mr. speaker, hypocrisy is reaching new heights today in this body. many of the same members who said bring it on as sequester loomed, many of the members who relished, forcing the president to make across-the-board cuts, are now in a rush to apply another band-aid for this

r boehner said the risis.eake sequestration bill included 98% of what republicans wanted, and republicans showed that they valued their anti-tax ideology. more than defense or any other cuts. now, now that sequestration failed as a result they claimed, oh, it doesn't need to hurt very much. and when the cuts bite, you know, the president must be doing this just to make a political point. . the read the bill caucus needs to read the bill. it was about air traffic control. today we are going to apply a much needed band-aid. maybe tomorrow we can have a bill applied to cancer research. then the next day let's have a bill about cancer treatments. next day have a bill about head start. then let's have one about tuition assistance to our military personnel. then let's have one about the

border patrol. by the way, if and when we apply these band-aid, we need to realize we are shifting cuts to equally important areas that aren't in the news at the moment. or that don't have powerful lobbies working on their behalf. my colleagues, i want to address these crises as much as any member. i want to contain the damage, but damage control is not a budget policy. sequestration is a self-inflicted wound unworthy of those who profess to govern. it's hypothetical, misleading, having imposed indiscriminate cuts on the administration to pretend the president could fix this problem with the flick of a wrist. sequestration is a disaster. it needs to be reversed. it needs to be replaced by a comprehensive budget plan that includes tax expenditures and entitlements which are the real drivers of the deficit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman's time has expired. mr. latham: i thank the speaker.

i'd now like to recognize the distinguished gentleman from arkansas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arkansas is recognized for one minute. mr. cotton: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to encourage my colleagues to pass this measure to stop president obama's needless furlough of air traffic controllers. further this legislation empowers the f.a.a. to restore funding for 150 towers operated by private contractors around the country. the f.a.a. furloughs have received most of the media attention this week, but we shouldn't overlook the role of these contractor operated towers play in our nation's aviation infrastructure in communities like texarkana, arkansas. these airports handle almost 30% of all aviation traffic, providing vital relief at some of our most congested airports. the importance of these towers can't be overstated which is why earl irthis year i introduced legislation with 59 bipartisan co-sponsors to restore funding for those towers. now i'm confident that f.a.a. will use the authority of this bill not only to end the

needless furloughs but also to restore funding for these essential contractor operated air traffic control towers. again i want to thank my colleagues for their support for this measure. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: mr. speaker, before i yield time i'd like to remind my colleagues that this bill passed the house, senate, and was signed by the president. that was what brought the sequestration. mr. speaker, i yield one minute to our democratic leader from california, ms. pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding. this is really a very unusual morning. we are here because of the refusal of republicans to come to the table for a conference. what is a conference? a conference is a public open meeting where differences between the house budget bill and the senate bill can be

reconciled. it is done with transparency and in full public view. our priorities, we have the american people be the judge of what is their statement of values. afraid of that public scrutiny, the republicans have refused to appoint conferees for a conference. conferees for a conference. to all upon the speaker appoint conferees so we can have that public airing, that transparent view of something very important. the republican leadership has said in the house and senate, they want regular order. what is the regular order? the regular order is the house passes a bill, the senate passes a bill, you go to conference. now afraid that their views may be rejected by the american

people, they don't want to go to conference. and that's why we are here this morning for sequestration. what is sequestration? sequestration is a mindless across-the-board cutting of what we are now recognizing, and republicans are recognizing, as something that should not be cut. it affects the efficiency and safety of our airports. that's very important. but as our distinguished democratic whip, mr. hoyer, has pointed out, there is much more that needs to be addressed. instead of using this as a vehicle, one of the distinguished chairmen said earlier, the safety of our airport should not be subject to political debate. neither should the education of our children, nutrition for our seniors, four million meals on wheels. tens of thousands of children

thrown off head start. our defense, mindless across-the-board cuts, and our defense, what that means for our national security and for the workers in our national security sector is a -- the list goes on and on. o investments in our future. biomedical research. cut by this. so i suppose if this is an example of governance that the republicans will next come up with something else and say we should exempt that. why don't we just get rid of the problem? why don't we just get rid of the problem and go to conference? someone in the press said to me does this hurt your leverage in going to conference? i said no. this is an opportunity because it demonstrates to the american people how unwise this course of action is and how much better it

would be to find solutions to get results in the regular ordinary, respectful of everyone's point of view, but recognizing that decisions made here have an impact, not only in the lives of the children, and the lives of their teachers, the lives of their all consumers, it will van impact on our economy as well. this should be a clarion call. it's almost ludicrous to hear my republican colleagues get up there and talk about their individual -- most of us have airports. we understand what this issue is about. why don't you understand that there is a great deal at stake, including efficiency and the safety of our airports, but also, again, the education of our children. how can we sit there and say, four million meals on wheels for seniors? gone.

but that's not important. over 70,000 children off head start. but that's not important. what is important is for the republicans to hold a hard line about the public debate about the budget that a conference would provide. members, vote the way they are going to vote on this, but recognize, recognize that this is not the way congress should be meeting the needs of the american people. let's go to conference. mr. speaker, appoint conferees so we can end this mindless addressing the sequestration. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: thank you, mr. speaker. i would now like to recognize the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. dent, for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. mr. dent: thank you, mr. speaker. i do support this legislation. in our subcommittee hearing on

wednesday, f.a.a. administrator admitted that he sought no administrative flexibility to help the flying public. so we are giving him that flexibility now with this bill. the f.a.a. blind-sided the airlines, airports, the unions, and the flying public by failing to properly notify them seskly about implementation of the sequester, only notified them about one week ago about the specifics. that's outrageous. this bill fixes the problem. by keeping air traffic controllers working and the towers operating. this legislation provides the flexibility the f.a.a. needs an should have been asked for by the administration. again classic case of mismanage. i'm pleased to -- mismanagement. i'm pleased to vote for this. the speaker pro tempore: any manifestation of approval or disapproval of proceedings or other audible conversation is in violation of the rules of the house. the gentleman from arizona virginia tech. mr. pastor: mr. speaker, i yield

one minute to the gentleman from west virginia, the ranking member of the authorizing committee, mr. rahall. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from west virginia is recognized for one minute. mr. rahall: i thank the gentleman from arizona for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 1765. as the flight delays mounted this week due to the furlough and many republicans claim that the f.a.a. had the flexibility to avoid this disruption, and that politics were played. that's kind of like the kettle -- like calling the kettle black. just last month in march many of these same members recognized their across-the-board nature of the sequester when a provision was included in the transportation bill to avoid the furlough of meat inspectors who would otherwise have been furloughed. nothing has changed in the see questionser law since last month. secretary of transportation ray lahood is an honorable man and i take issue with those saying he's playing politics. the piecemeal approach to

address the sequester, i share your concerns. i share the concerns of others being burdened by the sequester such as a child thrown out of head start or seniors depending on meals and wheels. the rash of delays we witness this week as the sequester began to take effect is not just an inconvenience to business or vacation travelers, transport patients. i ask insert the rest of my he remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: mr. speaker, i would like to recognize the distinguished chairman of the transportation infrastructure committee, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. shuster. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from pennsylvania is recognized for one minute. mr. shuster: i thank the gentleman. i rise in support of h.r. 1765 so that we can stop this needless pain on the 34er7b traveling public and our economy. the administration and f.a.a. has refuse for months to provide us with a plan to work with the airline industry to figure out how they could -- this could be implemented without all this

pain to the traveling public and our economy. i'd like to he remind my colleagues thistry -- industry provides $1 trillion to our economy. it's extremely important to the hardworking men and women of america that our airlines and folks are getting where they need to be on time without delay. this is a very, very damaging to the economy. again i believe this has been mismanaged and i believe that this bill will force the administration, force them to stop these needless furloughs so we can continue making sure that the airline industry is functioning. to keep our economy stronger, growing, and to stop, as i said, the safety concerns to the traveling public. with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from arizona virginia tech. mr. pastor: i yield one minute to the gentleman from washington. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from washington is recognized for one minute. mr. larsen: thank you, mr. speaker. before he we start patting each other on the back for this bill, i think it's important that we recognize we are not fixing a bigger problem that sequester has created.

earlier this month it was reported that head start students in my district will have to find their own way to school and bus service is being cut because of see questionser. perhaps now we can ask these 4-year-olds to ride tricycles. children of military families are going to go to school where budgets are being cut because of reductions in impact aid mandated by sequestration. we are not doing anything to help those kids today. we are not helping seniors in arlington, washington, getting meals on wheels no longer delivered to them. it's not just my district. every member of this house represents a district with kids and seniors who are being hurt thanks to our failure to clean up the mess we caused. this lands somewhere short of a profile in courage. this is a band-aid. sequestration needs a triple bypass surgery. sequestration is a little lit like the person who kicks a boulder and blames it for his

broken he toe. congress created this problem. we need to fix t yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: mr. speaker, i'd now like to recognize the gentleman from illinois, mr. davis, for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for one minute. mr. davis: thank you to the gentleman from iowa. i'd like to first thank the senate for sending this piece of legislation over to us to provide a fix, a fix that is necessary to provide, but the administration through lack of leadership is proving that we have to do this now. we are here today because this administration has decided to put politics over damages. from the very beginning of sequestration, this administration and its departments claim that they did not have the flexibility to avoid cuts that affect americans the most. the proposed tower clotings and the f.a.a. furloughs that were announced this week, they are not just wrong, they are irresponsible and indefensible. the bottom line is the f.a.a. already has the flexibility we are granting them today, yet

they are unwilling to take advantage of that. today we are here because it's time to put an end to the excuses and political gimmicks and we owe it to the american people to govern like statesmen by passing this bill to get the f.a.a. to implementing spending cuts responsibly to protect the traveling public. mr. president, i urge you tell your administration, tell them to grow up. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: i yield to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. andrews: americans are understandably upset at standing and waiting at airport gates. there are moms sitting and waiting at home to enroll their children in head start. after this bill, they'll still be waiting. there are pilots in our air force and our navy sitting and waiting to fly their training

missions. 1/3 of our planes are grounded. after this bill, they'll still be sitting. they'll still be waiting. senior citizens who need to go to chemotherapy at outpatient clinics around this country, but because of the cutbacks of sequestration, their doctors aren't seeing them. after this bill they'll still be sitting, they'll still be waiting. this congress has done too much sitting and too much waiting when it comes to sequestration. the senate has passed a budget that ends sequestration. there's an opportunity to go to conference, negotiate and pass that budget. instead of sitting and waiting, let's start working and negotiating and pass the senate budget. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: thank you, mr. speaker. i'd like to recognize the gentleman from florida, the former chairman of the transportation and infrastructure committee, mr.

mica, for one minute. the speaker pro tempor the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. mica: thank you, mr. latham. why are we here? we're here because of a colossal failure of leadership and the ability to manage resources. first of all, i can tell you there are plenty of air traffic controllers. just go online and get this report, plan for the future. some of our airports have far more air traffic controllers than we need. in fact, air traffic control the last 10 years is down 27%. we still have close to 15,000 air traffic controllers. this legislation does provide a fig leaf for the administration who said they don't have the authority. i could tell you they have the authority and ability to move forward and resources around. so that gives us the opportunity to get the flying public flying again. so, again, we have the

resources, they have the money. here we're giving them the final fig leaf that they have asked for and they say they need to get this done. i can tell you if ronald reagan were president we would not be in this mess. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for one minute. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. after the vote on this today, members of this house are going to run for the airports. they're all going to be flying home on airplanes and, yes, they will make it easier for members of congress to get through those lines and they will pat themselves on the back and say job well done. well, obviously we should address the issue at the airports, but we need to address the other issues right now and not make it easier for members of congress to fly home for a week away when we should be a week right here making

sure we do not see the negative impacts of the sequester grind on for those kids in head start, for the seniors on meals on wheels, for people doing important research. look, mr. speaker, four times this year we have offered a proposal to replace the entire sequester, to achieve the same deficit reduction without the kind of damage that's been done and four times we even -- haven't had a chance to vote on the floor of the house. now we're simply asking to go to conference. the republicans are complaining the senate didn't pass a budget. they got one. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: mr. speaker, i'd now like to recognize the gentlewoman from minnesota, mrs. bachmann, for 1 1/2 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from minnesota is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mrs. bachmann: i thank mr. latham for offering this bill.

it's high time that the f.a.a., mr. speaker, have the flexibility they need to have on closures of any air traffic control towers. it is my hope that st. cloud, minnesota remains open. they're vital, much needed. we're looking at approximately 189 airports. but i want to speak to something else. we were listening to representative hoyer and representative pelosi be extremely passionate about the loss that we'll see for children through head start, for senior citizens through meals on wheels, for children who will be dealing with other various food nutrition programs. that breaks everyone's hearts, but i want to remind the people of this country that it was former speaker pelosi, representative hoyer, senator reid and president obama who signed the sequestration bill, and it was press secretary jay carney who admitted that the sequestration was president

obama's idea. there are numerous republicans that voted against the sequestration because we knew all of these calamities were in the future. and so it reminds me of the shakespeare line, thou protest th too much. we voted against this bill and it seems like the higher the level of passion that equals the conscience that we're seeing of those who voted the wrong way on this bill in the first time. so i'm for this bill. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: mr. speaker, before i yield time to the lady, i have to remind my colleague that i voted against that bill, and the bill passed because there was the majority of republicans who supported it. and so we just can't blame one

house or one senate or the president because all of us share the blame. >> if the gentleman will yield? mr. pastor: 130ekds. mr. hoyer: the republicans offered their -- mr. pastor: 30 seconds. mr. hoyer: the republicans offered their bill, it was called cut, cap and balance and they voted on that bill before we ever got to the sequester and in cut, cap and balance, your alternative, if you didn't reach your numbers was squerser -- sequester. sequester was your policy and in the c.r. that you had mr. rogers bring to the floor, which i voted against, as it went from here to there as every democrat, it said it was going to be subject to the sequester or nothing. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: i yield one minute to the gentlelady from california, ms. waters. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from california is recognized for one minute. ms. waters: thank you very much, mr. speaker. i rise to support h.r. 1765,

the reducing flight delays act of 2013. i don't want anybody to be mistaken about why i support this bill. i want mrs. bachmann to understand that we know that she has led the tea party and the right wing on all of these issues and that she led on the discussion on sequestration. it was a bad policy, it should not have been adopted by either side of the aisle. however, that is the order of the day, and we need to bring the budget to the floor and have a conference committee so we can adopt some of what was adopted on the senate side to get rid of the sequestration. meanwhile, the f.a.a. plans to furlough the vast majority of the f.a.a.'s nearly 47,000 employees, including nearly 15,000 air traffic controllers for approximately one day during each two-week period in order to comply with sequestration. the furloughs have already

began. they started on april 21, 2013. and so we're going to be backed up in these airports and it is time to understand this is an emergency and let's get it over with by passing this bill today. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: at this moment i'll reserve my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa researches his time. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: mr. speaker, how much time do we have? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona has 2 1/2 minutes. the gentleman from iowa has 7 1/2 minutes. mr. pastor: i'll ask my chairman, do you want to even out the time and i'll reserve my time if you like? mr. latham: do you have two more speakers? mr. pastor: i just have one more. i was going to suggest you go ahead with your speaker. you'll have one. i have one and then we'll close. i'll yield one minute to the gentlelady from texas, ms.

jackson lee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from texas is recognized for one minute. ms. jackson lee: i ask unanimous consent to address the house. i know the american people are watching the blame game but the blame game falls clearly on this side of the aisle. my republican friends held this place hostage. we won't pay the debt ceiling, we won't pay our debts. now we're losing two million jobs, 4,800 head start programs. i believe in air traffic controllers but we're holding them hostage. what about the person who cannot afford an airline ticket? and so i'm saying today that it is important that we stand for the millions of dollars that we are losing for homeland security. mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 900, a one-sentence bill that will repeal a section of the budget control act of 2011 to get rid of the sequester. go to budget conference, have conferees, have a budget, get rid of the sequester, bring it up now, mr. speaker. i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 900.

the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman from iowa yield for that purpose? mr. latham: yes. ms. jackson lee: can we bring it up now? h.r. 900 right now. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentleman from iowa yield for that purpose? mr. latham: no. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker, let me just say this. we got to save the traveling public. i ask the question about 5,000 children in texas that will lose head start or the millions of seniors or our military families that will lose the support because we got the sequester all on the shoulders of those that believe that the way we run the federal government is a slash and burn. have a heart. help the american people. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: thank you, mr. speaker. now i'd like to recognize the gentleman from texas, mr. farenthold, for 1 1/2 minutes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. farenthold: thank you, mr. speaker. we've heard a lot of rhetoric that sequestration is the

problem. i'd like to remind you that sequestration that president obama proposed was the only solution we could agree on to the real problem, the fact that this government is spending close to $1.50 for every $1 that it brings in. that being said, sequestration came into effect and we're now having to deal with it. it was our intent all along to find cuts. we couldn't get agreement from the other side to find the cuts. and now even though sequestration is painful, it is working. we see in this bill that we'll take the f.a.a., get the cuts that need to be made to their budget made without affecting flight delays and without furloughing people. it's my contention that this can happen all throughout the government and all throughout all agencies. if these agencies and the president had come back to this congress saying we can do these cuts this way, let us do this, i imagine almost every one of those would have passed on unanimous consent. they certainly probably would have passed on suspension like this one.

i urge my colleagues to take this first step to solve the problem with the f.a.a. and i look forward to working with other government agencies and the obama administration to find the cuts we need and to spare the american people the pain that's intentionally being inflicted because some people don't want to cut a dime out of the american budget. you know, the american people know there's waste, fraud and abuse in this government and that there are savings to be had and we're going to find it and we're going to try to do it in the best possible way. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: mr. chairman, how much time do we have? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona has a minute and a half remaining. mr. pastor: a minute and a half. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from iowa has six minutes remaining. mr. pastor: ilavenue yield one minute -- i'll yield one minute to the gentlelady from washington, d.c., ms. holmes norton. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from washington,

d.c. is recognized. ms. norton: i thank the gentleman for yielding. congress did not foresee the controllers crisis. they will not foresee the next one. we have not solved the controller's crisis with money. it was not about money. it was not about cuts. it was solved the old-fashioned way. they simply moved money around. this is exactly what was done with appropriations that are not having this crisis. can solve this if we have a meeting of both sides of the aisle on the budget. what would happen at that meeting would probably be not to cut a thing but simply to allow agencies the flexibility to move money around precisely as has been done with the controllers crisis. not one cent was changed, just the flexibility, the common sense that we now need to do with every single appropriation. i yield back and thank the gentleman. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlewoman yields back. the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: might i inquire of the gentleman from arizona, you have 30 seconds left, if you'd like to go ahead and close, i'll reserve at this time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i will consume. mr. speaker, i rise to ask my colleagues to support this bill. it is a one-time fix in a crisis we're having today with our air traffic system. but i join my colleagues as well as probably my chairman in asking the house leadership, both the republican leadership, democratic leadership, to please work on a comprehensive solution to sequester in order that we can bring regular order and get the type of government the americans deserve and with that i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from iowa is recognized. mr. latham: i thank the

gentleman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. to associate myself with my good friend and ranking member on the subcommittee, mr. pastor, just said. that we've got to find a solution. this is a horrible way to run a government with sequester, when you take a meat ax approach to departments that have no common sense. that's why we need to get back to regular order around here. actually do appropriation bills. we would avoid these types of catastrophic -- potential catastrophic situations that we find ourselves in. mr. speaker, i would just ask everyone to understand that the senate sent this over last night. it's now an h.r. bill. our bill, the senate will approve it as soon as we pass it in the house here. it's very important we do this

for the american people. the traveling public. for safety of the system. to make sure that our commerce continues. i would ask everyone to support this bill. let's fix the big problem. let's come to a budget agreement. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the question is, will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill, h.r. 1765. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed -- mr. pastor: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from arizona is recognized. mr. pastor: i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of

representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is express prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 361, the nays are 41. zero recorded as present. 2/3 of those voting having responded in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid op the table - on the table.

the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to house resolution 178 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of h.r. 527. will the gentleman kindly resume the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 527 which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to amend the

helium act to complete the privatization of the federal helium reserve in a competitive market fashion that ensures stability in the helium markets while protecting the interests of american taxpayers, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole rose earlier today, amendment number 4 printed in house report 113-47 offered by the gentleman from texas, mr. thornberry, had been disposed of. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, the unfinished business is the request for recorded vote on amendment number 2 printed in house report 113-47, by the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. dent, on which the further proceedings were postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 printed in house report number 113-47, offered by mr. dent of pennsylvania. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for recorded vote will rise and

be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes electronic device. this is a two-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 87. the nays are 312. he amendment is not adopted. the question on the amendment in the nature of a substitute as amended. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendment is adopted. accordingly, under the rule, the committee rises.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration the bill h.r. 527, and pursuant to house resolution 178 reports the bill back to the house with an amendment adopted in the committee of the whole. under the rule the previous question is ordered. is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the amendment reported from the committee of the whole? if not, the question is on adoption of the amendment in the nature of a substitute as amended. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the question is on engrossment and third reading of the bill. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the aye vs. it. third reading. the clerk: helium act to complete the privatization of the federal helium reserve in a competitive market fashion that ensures stability in the helium markets while protecting the interests of american taxpayers, nd for other purposes.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois rise? >> mr. speaker, i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: is the gentleman opposed to the bill? >> i am opposed in its current form. >> the gentleman qualifies. the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mr. schneider of illinois moves to recommit the h.r. 527 to the committee on natural he resources with instructions to report the same back to the house forthwith with the following amendment. add at the end the following, section, banning exports to hostile nations that seek nuclear weapons or missile technology. nothing in this act authorizes the export of helium from the federal helium reserve as that term is defined in the amendments made by this act to iran, north korea, or syria, or

to any person, including any successor, aside, affiliate member, or joint venture with an ownership interest in any property or project, any portion of which is owned by such person, in violation of the international emergency economic powers act, 50 united states code, 1702, for who in the judgment of the president is likely to transfer or divert such helium to iran, north korea, or syria in violation of federal law or executive order prohibiting trade with iran, north korea, or syria. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the house will be in order. the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. speaker, this

is the final amendment to the bill which will not kill the bill or accepted it back to committee. if adopted the bill will immediately proceed to final passage as amended. i rise to offer this motion to ensure that our strategic reserve of helium gas does not fall into the hands of those who wish the harm the united states or target our allies abroad. helium is a crucial component of manufacturing and research -- essing the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. mr. sha midre: helium a crow shall component manufacturing processing here in the united states. the consistent availability of helium to united states companies and research institutions is therefore essential to our global competitiveness as well as our national security. one of the largest consumers of helium gas in the united states,

utilizing it for a number of crucial national securities. for example, the deployment of critical communication satellites which is made possible by helium helps to support our global information network and must remain a strategic u.s. asset. helium has been utilized to purge explosive rocket fuel from intercontinental ballistic missiles and continues to be a strategy resource for any nation looking to build an advanced missile program. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the gentleman is recognized. mr. schneider: helium is also utilized in cooling nuclear reactors. this motion seeks to manage this national resource in a safe and responsible way. by, and i quote, banning exports to hostile nation that is seek nuclear weapons or missile technology, end quote. helium can be used in the missile technology utilized by iran, syria, and north korea, putting millions of lives at

risk in the middle east, on the korean peninsula, and possibly around the world. over the last several months we have seen escalating belligerence from north korea, iran, and syria including missile tests, acceleration of nuclear programs, and the apparent use of chemical weapons by the syrian regime against its own citizens. mr. speaker, i believe the house must adopt the language to ensure that the proper safeguards are in place to deny these rogue states access to our national helium reserve for their he in fairous purchases. i know we can all agree that the threats emanating from these countries are serious and our enemies seek access to technology and resources to harm the united states and our allies. our helium reserve is an asset we must secure from their reach. the actions of these regimes continues to invoke national condemnation. this body has repeatedly acted

to sanction these regimes for their reprehensible behavior. this motion is simply one more step to provide siff guards against the threat posed by these countries. we must deny the export of helium from the strategic reserve, specifically to the nations of iran, north korea, and syria. and allow the president the authority to deny exports to businesses or entities that could potentially dessert -- divert helium to these governments. we have seen an increasing number of provocation from north korea, iran, and syria. these incidents are directly targeted to the united states, and threaten the existence of israel. it is our responsibility to ensure that our national assets, including our strategic helium reserve, are guarded from being used against us. this motion to recommit would help in achieving that goal. the motion provides a meaningful

and necessary safeguard against the potential use of the strategic helium reserve and helps to support our national security. again, this is the final amendment to the bill which will not bill the bill or send it back to committee. if adopted the bill will immediately proceed to final passage as amended. i urge all members to support this commonsense language. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington rise? mr. hastings: i rise to claim time in opposition to the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, the house isn't in order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is correct. he house will be in order. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i'm really disappointed to see this. there is so much talk about in thousand about working together on both sides of the aisle. -- in this house about working together on both sides of the aisle. there are members on both sides of the aisle that were pretty suspicious when you saw a bill

sponsored by hastings, markey, flores and holt. yet, that's precisely what we managed to get out of the house natural resources committee. it's a bipartisan bill that deals with a very serious issue. this motion to recommit is something that we've seen before. nothing in our bill violates the international emergency economic powers act. nothing in our bill violates that and yet that's reflected in this m.t.r. and secondly, the countries that are mentioned in here are countries that are hostile to the united states. that's cofered under an entirely different bill or an entirely different statute in the law. we do not need this to slow down this process of passing a bill that is needed. so i urge my colleagues to vote no on the m.t.r. and yes on the underlying bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. without objection, the preesks question is ordered -- the previous question is orlandoed. the question is on the motion to recommit. those in favor say aye.

those opposed, no. the noes have it. >> mr. speaker, i ask for a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is five-minute vote. pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 20, this five minute d vote on the motion to recommit will be followed by a five-minute vote on passage of the bill if ordered. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 186, the nays are 211. this motion is not adopted. the question is on passage of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the gentleman from washington is recognized. for what purpose does? mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation

with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 394. the nays are one.

the bill is passed. without objection, the the motion to reconsider is laid pon the table. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the spomplee of the journal which the chair will put de novo. the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. and the journal stands approved. for what purpose does the gentleman from washington seek recognition? mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that when the house adjourns today it adjourn to meet at :00 p.m. on tuesday, april 30, 2013, that the order of the house of january 3, 2013 regarding morning hour debate not apply on that day. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered.

the chair will entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? entucky. without objection. >> mr. speaker, the sixth district of kentucky has had some good news this month. tiffany and company added 75 jobs at their lexington manufacturing plant. global law firm opened a lectionlington global services center with plans to employ 250 workers. toyota announced it will add 750 jobs and invest an additional

$360 million in their georgetown manufacturing facility to build the lexus. i am honored to represent the hardworking kentuckians who brought this recognition to the bluegrass. mr. barr: it is a true credit to our work force that these first class companies chose to make these investments in kentucky. take a moment and think about how many more jobs we could create without a $17 national debt clogging the engines of economic growth. if congress is serious about promoting private sector job creation, then we must remove government imposed obstacles to growth. that means repealing and replacing obamacare, cutting spending, reforming our tax code, reducing regulations, and unleashing american energy. only then will we make these headlines the norm and not the exception. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise?

>> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to recognize an extraordinary group of students in the city of fort worth i'm honored to represent in congress. hal handrow, conswaleo, roger herring, miguel, and mr. ortiz each awarded a community scholarship to attend texas christian university. they recognize a diverse student body. to help assure this the university began the community scholars program in 1999 to bring students in who would otherwise not be able to afford a college education. mr. veasey: it has 11 high schools in north texas area with 30 scholarships given each year and a 90% college graduation date. , each of thechosen

students are bright, motivated and accomplished. not only do they do these students exhibit academic excellence, they also take part in volunteer work, and demonstrate leadership in their communities. once again i commend these students. i know they will wear their purple with pride. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? without objection. >> i'm heartbroken as i have heard more about dr. kermit gosnell's philadelphia medical practice during the past few weeks. the brutal method he used to ensure death from a botched abortion, several the spinal cord of a baby born alive is disgusting. i pray we are all shocked and disturbed by what has been revealed about abortion during this trial. where dr. gosnell stands trial, there is over a million babies

that dies from abortion each year. that's almt two times more death than caused by cancer in the u.s. every year and two times more than heart disease. abortion is taking an innocent life and we have to stand against it. life is precious. children are precious. people talk about choice when we talk about abortion. i encourage more americans to choose life and protect the most innocent in our nation. yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from nevada rise? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. the sequester is still hurting our constituents and despite votes today, congress is continuing to turn a blind eye to many communities affected by these draconian across-the-board cuts. mr. horsford: yes, we should not furlough air traffic controllers and other f.a.a. employees. it's not smart and i know as a representative from nevada that

it is unnecessarily hurting our tourism and local economy. house republicans continue to ignore the impacts of the cuts on head start, on title 1 schools, and on meals on wheels program for our seniors. why is that? why are these students and seniors still on the chopping block? do their interests not count in the halls of congress? these mindless cuts are harming our kids' futures and our seniors' well-being. and this congress long overdue in paying attention to their needs. i have said before, mr. speaker, i'm willing to work with anyone from either side of the aisle to come up with solutions to replace the sequester, but we need to do it for all communities not just one. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. if a ompson: mr. speaker,

legislative process effective communication can help bring attention to important issues and advance good polcy. fortunately all too often the rhetoric doesn't match reality. take for example medicare so-called competitive bidding programs for medical equipment. the program was intended to reduce medicare costs and ensure beneficiaries have access to quality services n practice the system denies competition which hurts small business providers and worsens access to quality services which harms seniors. in fact, despite the program's catchy title, more than 240 market option experts and economists have warned that the medicare bidding program harms competition that will ultimately hurt patients. today i join in support of legislation h.r. 1717, the medicare market pricing program act of 2013, which would replace this program with one that's not just labeled competitive but is competitive and maintains beneficiary access to quality items and services. i encourage my colleagues to

join in support of the medicare market pricing program act of 2013. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from oregon rise? without objection. mr. blumenauer: thank you, mr. speaker. there is an amazing collection of young people from around the country that are gathering in our nation's capital this weekend. they are part of the annual competition on the united states constitution. my pleasure to visit with my constituents from grant high school in portland this morning. young people who dug deep in the constitution, prepared passionately to defend the principles and developing skills that will last for a lifetime. mr. speaker, it's unfortunate that congress has failed to support the classroom law project, budgetairly. i would hope that there is an opportunity for them to reflect on what these young people are doing and what we could do in addition if we step back up and

provided the resources so they could be available for more young people. at a time when america faces challenges and there is a break down in the other body, not even being able to approve something that 90% of the american people want, we ought to be supporting young people who are doing this important work of democracy. i congratulate grant high school, the coach, and the coaches that are working with them, but regardless of the outcome, they are already winners. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? >> i ask unanimous consent to remove mr. brady of pennsylvania as a co-sponsor of h.r. 1461. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. r. goodlatte: thank you. for what purpose does the gentleman from california rise? ithout objection.

>> with the darkness and decay that has descended upon this country, we have a remedy, i'm glad to report here. this coming week, next thursday, we can celebrate the 67 -- 62nd annual national day of prayer in the united states. by official proclamation. it's played a vital role, prayer, in the formation of this country by our founders and we have this opportunity not just on this day but every day as we do at the beginning of session in this body. i encourage everyone to -- everybody to take part. mr. lamalfa: i have artwork next to me that hangs in my office here and it's a prayer for guidance that george washington once wrote and i would like tooth an excerpt of that give -- i would like to do an excerpt of that.

give me repentence from dead works. pardon my wand, and direct my thoughts on too myself. the god of my salvation. teach me how to live in thy fear, labor in thy service and run in the ways of thy commandments. read the rest but please, remember national day of prayer, may 2, next week. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rom michigan rise? without objection. mr. conyers: mr. speaker, i have a one-sentence bill, h.r. 900, that repeals the sequester . and many of my colleagues have already begun talking about it and joining with me on it today . these cuts are currently diminishing our nation's

educational quality, our research output, leaving more with untreated mental illnesses, more hunger, more homelessness and fewer federal criminal prosecutions. the sequester means that we'll have 2,100 less food inspectors for examining the safety of our food. if congress is unable to craft a bipartisan agreement that takes sequestration off the table, i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 900, my one-sentence bill, to repeal the sequester. the speaker pro tempore: under guidelines consistently issued by successive speakers as recorded in section 956 of the house rules manual, the chair is constrained not to entertain the request until it has been cleared by the bipartisan floor and committee leaderships. mr. conyers: under those

circumstances, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the entleman's tiasxpired. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? without objection. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to introduce the veterans benefits claims faster filing act. this no-cost legislation will shorten the time that veterans must wait for their claims to be decided. nationally the average wait time for a claim is nearly 300 days. in el paso, texas, the veterans i represent wait an average of 439 days. we must do better. my legislation will require the v.a. to report and post processing times and award rates for claims filed in a variety of ways. rocker rocker from the fastest -- rorkrork from the fastest way -- mr. o'rourke: to the fastest way and the slowest way, which

is filing on a nonstandardized piece of paper. informing veterans that they developed claims are consistently turned around in 1 hundred days or less -- 100 days or less. imagine your veterans saving months of waiting unnecessarily on a decision on their claim. we owe a lot to our veterans and we can uphold our end of the bargen to them by ensuring that they receive the benefits they have earned and depend on in a timely manner. i urge all of my colleagues to support the faster filing act and, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas rise? without objection. ms. jackson lee: mr. speaker, over the past couple of weeks, in my district, week of been working with a very small -- we've been working with a very small school district, about 7,000 young people.

bright, energetic and prepared to reach and fulfill their future. unfortunately the state of texas chooses to close that school not because they're not meeting the leave no child behind, but because one high school did not meet the threshold by two students. over the next couple of days we expect to hear from the state to ask this district to terminate all employees. we offered to the state a collaborative response of having them to work with public charters and work with the public school system, keeping it a public school system. we again ask the state of texas, the governor of the state of texas, who has refused to give federal funds for education back to the districts. you know why? maybe it's because of sequester. but more importantly, i want to save those students, i want to save those employees. and i believe we can do it by eliminating the sequester. i ask unanimous consent to bring up h.r. 900, a one-sentence bill to eliminate the sequester. these children at the north

forest independent school district deserve to be able to graduate from a public school. it is shameful that they will be getting a notice of their beloved teachers, fire them all. i will go home to the district and stand against it. i ask for relief from the u.s. department of education and all of those who believe in educating our children and being responsible to our teachers who teach them and love them. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman's time has expired. as the chair previously advised, that request cannot be entertained absent appropriate clearance. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? without objection. >> today i'd like to take a moment to honor the life of a great american we lost earlier this week in my hometown of san antonio. he passed away at the age of 87 after a long and rewarding life, a life that literally

tranormed public education in texas and across the nation. like many of the folks who grew up on the west side of san antonio, he was a humble man, born into a migrant farm working family, he served in the navy and later in the air force reserves and he worked for years at kelly air force base. in 1968, with 15 other parents, he led the charge to change the way we do school finance, not only in texas but in the united states of america. he objected to the fact that property-poor districts were so far outspent and given much more money than property-rich districts in texas. cavetcavet he led that charge in 19 -- cavetcavet he led that charge -- mr. castro: in 1989 the texas supreme court ruled that the children of texas should have an equal education, no matter their income. he was a great man, he'll be sorely missed, he was a fighter and a champion of people. mr. speaker, i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois rise? without objection. ms. schakowsky: some of my republican colleagues were raging that air traffic was slowed by a so-called political manipulation of the sequester. i join most of my house colleagues in voting to make a special exception for the fairway, because we do want -- f.a.a., because we do want traffic to flow. but i have a news flash. cutting billions of dollars from the budget in a sequester, in a meat ax way, does have real consequences. furloughs are also occurring at the department of defense, at agriculture, at the u.s. customs and border protection. head start is cutting 70,000 slots for early childhood education in my neighboring indiana. there's a ralph being held to decide -- raffle being held to

decide which rn children are going to be kicked out of the head start program. four million meals on wheels are going to be cut for seniors who are depending on them. the medicare antifraud division is being cut. that makes no sense. and the sequester is projected to cost 750,000 american jobs this year. and, so mr. speaker, i too ask unanimous consent to bring h.r. 900 to the floor, that would repeal the sequester. the speaker pro tempore: as the chair previously advised, that request cannot be entertained absent appropriate clearance. for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that in the engrossment of h.r. 1765, the clerk strike account on page 2, line 14, and insert accounts. the speaker pro tempore: is there objection to the gentleman's request? without objection, so ordered.

for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? mr. cohen: to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. cohen: thank you. mr. speaker, today in memphis, tennessee, a great lady passed away. a lady who was as fierce, as brave, as courageous a woman as has ever lived in this country. a lady by the name of maxine smith. maxine smith was the executive secretary of the ncaap from 1962 up to somewhere around 2000. and she served on the memphis city school board from 1971 to 1975. she helped take memphis beyond jim crow and beyond segregation into a great city in america and in america's mainstream and she helped take america there. because the scourge of discrimination and desegregation stained this country and she was not allowed to enroll at memphis state

university, so she went to spellman and then she went up east to middleberry and got a masters and she went to work to help others and she spent her life fighting against discrimination. in all ways and all manners. she served on the state board of education in tennessee and made sure people got a good education. whether they were white or black. and she overcame all of the hate and discrimination that she faced and was a beautiful woman who lived dr. king's dream. seeing people and judging them by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. she was a person to be emulated, honored and remembered. she had a great life, a life extremely well lived and i will miss her and so will this nation. thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new hampshire rise? without objection. >> today the house proved that if it really wanted to, it can move quickly. today we made it easier for air travelers and i'm very happy

that we did that. but the sequester is still there and it is still impacting schools. i have a little head start that's going to be closed in my district. others are being impacted. we're laying off federal employees. this is impacting the military, impacting health research across the country. ms. shea-porter: and so i call on the house majority to continue the work they started today. don't just choose one group. repeal this sequester. they have it in their power to put it on the floor, to repeal the sequester, the american public are asking for this and it's our obligation to do this. not just for the air travelers but everybody around the country. so thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman rom virginia rise? without objection. >> thank you, mr. speaker. today we passed a fix for the f.a.a. and for air traffic controllers because of a problem created by

sequestration. mr. connolly: but we only have 10 fingers. there are many many holes than 10. we've already plugged the hole on the pentagon. we've already plugged the hole on food inspectors the usda. today we plug another one. sooner or later we have to recognize the dike itself is being undermined. and it's being undermined by something called sequestration. the time has come for congress to put aside partisan rangeling. it's time for the majority to show leadership and appoint conferees to a budget so we can actually work this out in a sensible way, not a meat ax wreckless way and get things done for the american people. sequestration is not rocket science, but it will remain beyond us if we continue the partisan fighting we've had in this house. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair lays before the house the following personal requests. the clerk: leaves of absence requested for mr. jones of north carolina for today and

mrs. with a lorsky of indiana for -- mrs. walorski of indiana for today. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the requests are granted. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> i seek one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> a deer friend of mine -- dear friend of mine, howard phillips, who when i first started out in politics was a conservative leader and a great father and leader and patriot. on april 20, howard phillips passed away. he grew up in boston where he became an avid baseball fan. he knew all the team, all the players -- teams, all the

players, and remained a passionate fan throughout his life. he fought hard to get into the boston latin school and from there he invaded the liberal bastion of harvard where he upheld conservative principles and even started the -- served on the chairman of the student council. stock stock howard made national -- mr. stockman: howard made national news. howard, a leader, a champion and a great father, and a great leader, founded the 1974, the t.c.c., the texas -- sorry, not texas, the conservative caucus. he became one of the major nationwide conservative organizations. made headlines for opposing the panama canal, supporting ronald reagan's effort to rebuild our defenses. the conservative movement will not be the same without howard. in fact, the conservative movement would not be what it is today white house his leadership. in 1960 -- today without his leadership. in 1960 he became the model for conservative political action groups.

he and other key leaders became the founders of what we know of the modern conservative movement. over the years, hard stood firm on conservative principles when it was often easier to compromise with the establishment and others. when we saw howard and when we saw the g.o.p. tilting too far from the left, he found the u.s. taxpayers party, now the constitution party, which nominated their candidates in 1992, 1996 and 2000. he was their nominee. it's a distinct pleasure that howard rose a new generation of conservative leaders, as a precursor to the tea party. howard was always there. . his work lives on through his family and children. howard's movement helped build a conservative caucus, and his son brad who found the persecution project in south sudan in saving lives in the battle of south

sudan and his son douglas which is a messagor homeschooling industry. many americans inspired by his leadership and vision, howard is survived by peggy and his six children and 18 grandchildren. god bless you, we love you. and if you all can make it on april 29 a funeral will be at mclean bible church. i yield back the balance of my time. god bless you, howie. we love you. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will recognize members for special order speeches without prejudice to the possible resumption of legislative business. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from texas, mr. gohmert, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. it is indeed an hon quor for me - honor for me to kneel to a friend, a man i am delighted was elected to join us last year, my friend from florida, for such

ime as he may consume. mr. yoho: i thank the gentleman from texas for yielding. mr. speaker, i have many gun control supporters say the second amendment is outdated. they point out the phrase, a ell regulated militia as their proof that armed citizens belong notice 18th century and not 291st crentry. we saw last week in boston they couldn't be more wrong. when the constitution and the second amendment were written, the story of the boston struggles during the revolutionary war was still fresh in america's memory. british troops looked at every american as a threat and treated them like virtual prisoners in the communities they built. that's why our founders made sure it would be law and a birthright for every law-abidinging -- law-abiding american that everyone would have the freedom to protect

themselves. these days many america's enemies don't wear the uniform of a nation. they try to avoid confrontation with our military and our police force, and they lurk in our streets, they hide out in our universities, and they wait for our due fences to go down. they don't say save their hatred for our heroes in uniforms, they unleash it on anyone who is free. the line between crime and terror is a thin one. any victim of a haven't crime has experienced terrorism in its most intimate and intense form. when we talk about guns and we look at the true meaning of the second amendment, it's clear that the passage of a couple centuries hasn't changed its intent much. the second amendment is a uniquely american value, as relevant today as when it was written. no other nation before ours has trusted the people to arm and protect themselves. when tragedies happen in tucson, aurora, and newtown, guns were

to blame. when the tragedy happened in boston last week, we rightly blamed the person and not the instrument. allowing law-abiding citizens to exercise their freedom of self-defense can help keep us safe and i will fight to protect this precious constitutional right. i yield back. thank you. r. gohmert: thank you. at this time i'm proud to yield to my friend from wisconsin, i'm proud wisconsin and texas are in the same country because wisconsin has certainly produced some great americans. with that i yield such time as he may consume to my friend. >> i appreciate the gentleman from texas yielding. our the past five months nation has seen unspeakable horrors bestowed upon the children of our country.

mr. duffy: from the massacre in newtown, the 23 innocent young first graders who lost their lives to just recently in the boston bombing where many lost heir lives, but specifically a third grader, richard martin, lost his life. richard, a couple weeks before, had just gotten his first communeon. there is a picture of richard in a sharp white suit and a proud toothless smile. he lost his life in boston. his little sister, janney, who was by him was also hit by the bomb. she lost her leg. she just started to take irish dancing, step dancing classes. she'll now be in recovery for months and years from that bombing. we have to look at what's happening in our country with regard to violence against children. as a country we have to soul search about violence against

our children. and we have been soul-searching. our families, our communities, we have been soul-searching in this institution about that very violence. we have a conversation about how do we protect our children? how do we keep them from this violence and scourge that is spreading across our country? but we soul search. meanwhile, in philadelphia, it has dozens if not hundreds of babies have had their lives taken from them. or they have been murdered. in ay in cardboard boxes, toilets trying to swim for air. where they had the backs of the next snipped, basically decapitated. that kind of horror is being bestowed on children in america. and yet where's the media?

where are the protests? where are the congressional hearings? where are parents? on air force one, find the white house, have a meeting with the president. where are the high-powered meetings with the senators across the aisle? they aren't happening. i don't have a picture for you today but many have seen it. a picture of the courtroom where the trial is going on. there is a section reserved for the media. the media, that loves great and a , loves fanfare, section reserved for the media at this trial and there is nobody there. there's been a blackout. the media has refused to cover his story. how about a poor imgrant mother who can't speak english who look

to her local community organization in philadelphia, who gets a recommendation for an abortion to go to the nice sounding women's medical society clinic. a clinic well-known for its filth and well-known for its health violations. poor, minority, immigrant goes to this clinic for an abortion and she loses they are life. -- her life. so we have to ask, where is naral? where is n.o.w.? where is mrs. barbara boxer standing up for poor minority women who are losing their lives in philadelphia at the hands of an abortion provider? here are they? the slents is deafening. you can't hear them. there is no voice given to that poor minority immigrant. there is no voice given to these

little babies who are so vulnerable at the start of their life. and they are voiceless. but no one, even those who say they stand up for women and babies, they are unwilling to stand up at this time. however if you are a white, privileged, law student from poors swing wide open and the media wants to cover your story. they want to cover your point of view. an abortion clinic that provides late-term, partial-birth abortion where babies are born alive, there is no outrage. there is no story. where's the naacp for these minority babies? where's the black congressional caucus? there's maxine waters? where's the leader of the democrat party? where are they?

lending their voice to these atrocities. this murder. i think it's important -- i'm a father of six. i have been there for the birth of all my babies. and i know we have a lot of parents in this institution and across the aisle, and listen, a newborn baby coming out they are voiceless, defenseless, they rely on us for everything. here's a picture of my sixth baby, marie victoria, just born. the pictures of the babies that die in philadelphia are bigger than this. they are more developed than this. and yet no one wants to stand up and shed light on these atrocities. and these unspeakable horrors. the dehumanization, desensitization of what happened

in philadelphia. and i think we have to ask ourselves why. why are my good friends across the aisle, who have families, who have had children, who care about minorities and the poor and care about children, i know because i hear them, where are they? why won't they join us? to expose us? is it that they care more about the abortion clinics than poor defenseless babies that are born alive and aren't provided care, aren't provided love? but are abandoned and left to die? i can't believe that's true. they agree more with partial-birth abortions, and babies are born alive, they are not willing to he provide aid? i can't believe that. not offering life savings treatment for the most vulnerable among us.

i think we have to look around in our communities, in our country, we have to look at this very institution. and we have to be better than this. we are better than this. we might disagree abortion. i'm pro-life guy. and i can accept the distinction,. how can anybody come forward to supports abortion and say i'm not going to defend a baby that's born alive. what kind of position is that? or that you won't lend your voice to this cause. you could come out and say i support abortion, but i don't support this. this is wrong. we are better as americans than that. we are better congress men and women than that. we have more bigger hearts than that. this is unacceptable in our country. we are going to have the abortion debate tore a while. that's ok.

but we have to draw the line somewhere. when do we step forward and say we are going to defend the most defenseless and most voiceless among us? when does that start? i think in this institution most of us have agreed that starts at birth. at least i think it starts at conception, but everyone has agreed it starts at birth. so why when we have this atrocity, this death, on our children in philadelphia, with dr. gosnell, that people haven't lent their voices to these children. babies deserve better than that. so i think it's incumbent upon this institution, our communities and our country and the media to make sure that we provide a voice, we provide a platform to those babies because we care more about those lives than we care about the abortion

industry and we care more about those babies than we care about exposing the horrors and atrocities of partial-birth abortion. we are better than that. i'm going to say this, though we may disagree on some issues, we do agree on protecting these little ones as they come into the world. i'm going to continue that fight. i know the gentleman from texas is passionate on this topic. has a loft things to talk about, but i appreciate him yielding a few minutes to chat. i yield back. mr. gohmert: i appreciate my friend from wisconsin so much in giving voice to those who have no voice. we hear so often on this floor

from people who mean what they say as they say, we have an obligation to help th most vulnerable amongst us. to help those who cannot help themselves. a first-born child this both hands, i could -- child in both hands, i could have held her in one but didn't want to take the chance, held a child that was smaller than some of these that in this tale of horror of abortions, to think that someone could take scissors and cut the back of and ck and cut the spine , it's y kill a child

virtually too much to take in. hope others will see the wisdom of what sean duffy was talking about. but it does seem people have been dessens advertised to so many things -- dessens advertised to so many things, they need to be resensitized to. every country, no matter what its strength, how strong, including this country that has become the strongest country in the history of the world, is already the most free country in the history of the world, more freedom, more opportunity than anyplace, including the great israel under solomon as king.

we're told that there's never been a king wiser than solomon. but the way this country was , unded, the way it was molded the way we gave credit to the creator, to divine providence, to the lord as referenced in the date of our constitution itself, when it's dated in the ear of our lord, 1787. they knew and they pointed out repeatedly that our rights, our liberties will not last beyond this country's recognition that all rights, all freedoms, all gifts, all liberties come from

a source. george washington referred to the divine author of our blessed religion in one of his writings. it's actually the prayer that he included in the resignation as commanding general of the revolutionary forces. and i know that in this nation we accept everyone, all religions, all people, no matter what their religious convictions are. including no religious convictions whatsoever. but it is critically important that we know where we've come from in order to have any idea where we're going.

and it is the nature of man, it the nature of humanity that , a nation reaches a peak some in my history classes in college would refer to the cycle that countries go through . some referencing back to the ancient greiss government, that there was a cycle -- greece government, that there was a psych of its rise and fall. i felt like it was more of a -- cycle of its rise and fall. i felt like it was more of a bell-shaped curve. once you reach the peak, people take their freedoms, their opportunities for granted, they stop believing that there's a hreat to those and as they get less and less sensitive to the fact that all glory, all

liberty is fleeting, then they would lose them. whether it's the cycle of rise and fall or a bell-shaped curve , it depends on us. tom brokaw had described the great estrogen ration as those who -- the greatest generation as those who recognized the danger of fascism and the oppression that existed in the 1940's and rose up and fought against it. unfortunately a guy that knows our history so well, that could write a great book on the great estrogen ration could turn -- greatest generation could turn around and a few short years later be completely de sensitized and show himself to be part of anything but a great generation because he could not even recognize a threat to this

civilization's existence. so hopefully people situated, as is he, will begin to recognize there are people that want to destroy our freedoms, they want to take what has been made into the greatest country, that's been blessed more than any country in history, and they want to act like there's no such thing as a threat to our security. to our freedom. to our own lives. to our lives and fortunes. whether there's a threat to our sacred honor has been completely up to us. as the signers of the declaration of independence pledged, our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor. to e question arises, is ang

buy off your enemies, make them love you with cash, make them love you with tanks, make them love you by sending them f-16's, make them love you by sending tear gas to use against those they don't like, is there any honor in this? we have the muslim brotherhood, a group in egypt, the freedom and justice party in egypt. they helped overthrow mubarak as this administration here in america turned our back on an ally. and we got muslim brotherhood. i continue to have people approach me, say they're from

egypt and they get so frustrated, they can't believe we're supporting the wrong people in egypt. just as those i've met with in afghanistan have begged us to stop trying to buy a friend in the taliban, especially those in the northern alliance who lost family and friends trying to fight the taliban and successfully defeating them on our behalf by early 2002. then we took back weapons that we'd provided, said, we got it from here. now 11 years later we're turning our back on you are a allies, -- on our allies, the moderate muslims that fought the taliban for us, and now trying to buy off the taliban who still want to destroy us.

they still want to end our freedom, make us suffer. because they consider us so deck dent -- decadent. and the administration has offers out there, from what i'm told in afghanistan, that -- and it's been reported widely in the news, that this administration has offered to buy them first-class offices in qatar so they'd have a world presence and have instant respectability around the world . that this administration has offered to release some of their murdering thugs who have spilled the blood of american patriots. in the most cowardly and can naiving ways -- caniving ways. so they have no respect for us. i wondered if perhaps president

obama were going to be right about perhaps he will. be right. maybe it will help america with countries who have shown hatred for this country. president obama said it was going to basically be a game changer, that muslim considers -- that muslim countries would have far more respect for us, since we had a president, as president obama said, who grew up in a muslim country, with admiration for the practices and teachings of muslims. a president who loved the call for prayer, loved hearing that. so, it's been over four years now and we've seen the polling

that in muslim countries around the world this united states favorability rating has fallen far below what it was under george bush. who did not grow up in mause limb country -- muslim country -- in a muslim country. so we found that that didn't work. and despite four years under this administration of trying to pander to those who want to destroy our way of life, who want to force a caliphate over america as they now are trying to do in egypt, libya, trying to do in other middle eastern ountries, but our constitution is what those of us who serve here took an oath to support and defend.

that's where we are supposed to stand. in full defense of our constitution, not the united nations charter, not shari'a law, but we took an oath to support and defend the constitution of the united states. it's been determined in this country by the courts that people have a first amendment right to burn, destroy a united states flag. the same flag that is draped -- has draped countless coffins and bodies of americans who, as lincoln said, gave their last full measure of devotion for our freedom. yet a first amendment right to destroy that flag, that symbol of freedom and liberty.

they've said there's a first amendment right to destroy holy regardless of how those books are held to be by so many in america. a story is written an told of thomas jefferson taking one of his many trips down pennsylvania avenue toward the capitol on a sunday morning with a big bible under his arm and someone said, mr. president, where are you going? he said, well, i'm going to church up in the capitol. they said, well, mr. president, you don't believe everything they do there. he said, sir, i'm the highest elected magistrate in this country, it is imperative that i set the proper example. jefferson felt he was setting

the proper example by coming to a nondenominational christian church here in the capitol that was held down the hall in what was then the house of representatives chamber. now called statuary hall. i have a bill that would require a flack be put up -- plaque be put up to inform people of the amazing history, thomas jefferson coined the phrase separation of church and state, said there needs to be a wall of separation between church and state. he saw it as more of a one-sided wall where the state would not interfere in religion , but certainly for this country to be at its greatest people would bring their religious convictions to the state and make it stronger and better. . according to church and state i found in the constitution, even felt it was appropriate to often have the marine band come and play hymns down the hall for

those who were at the christian worship service. i'm not advocating we go back to that. there is no need. we have churches all over this place now. but it is not appropriate to act as if those parts of our history are not true. they are true. they are part of our history. and it is the church that was so strong in the abolitionist vement that tried to bring about equal treatment. it was the church, not all churches because some -- there was prejudice, bias, bigotry in some churches, but those who truly understood the teachings of christ, stood so firmly and strongly against slavery.

then 100 years later an ordained christian minister named martin luther king jr. fought for civil rights, but he did so as a complete pacifist. not advocating violence. and his efforts succeeded. and he freed up young little white boys like me who are christians to treat brothers and sisters of any race, any color, any creed his brothers and sisters. it's all part of our history. the good parts, bad parts we shouldn't try to rewrite history. you got to know where you came from. -- of boston, the

people were excited to see the finish. race, the world famous boston marathon, so many friends of mine had dreamed to come run in the boston marathon. number of friends that have. it's a lot of excitement even in their exhaustion as they near the finish line. that's where cold-hearted, filled with iduals hate could set down bombs knowing they were going to kill very innocent people. how do you see a little 8-year-old child, knowing that child is going to be killed by what you put together and set down? how do you do that? how do you have such evil in your heart that you can do that?

how do you have such evil in your heart, you set a bomb down knowing that people that are still around it as you walk away as a coward are going to have their legs blown out from under them and never walk again. how do you do that? you have to be so full of hate or evil or some sick religious convictions that somehow you believe that there is someone or something, some deity that smiles upon that and think thinks that's wonderful when you kill or maim innocent people. and that somehow you'll be glorified by killing and maiming innocent people. very tragic. very, very tragic. but we know for some time the

f.b.i., the state department, the intelligence department, a number of departments have been trng to soften the language that they used, that they have used to train so that they don't offend people who want to kill us already. i didn't know anybody back in the 1980's that talked about radical islam. that 79 people were killed, hostages were taken, and embassy -- an embassy was teaken over. hostages held for over a year. 1983 people killed. marines way leied d.d. waylaid as our marine barracks in beirut was blown up. we didn't really talk about radical islam.

yet over time instead of recognizing the danger to this country, we have people of authority in this administration must not usehat we the terms that accurately describe what our killers believe, our wannabe killers believe, we can't use those words. they might be offended. or heaven's sake, 9/11 of 2001 was plotted while bill clinton was president. and no one who has any fairness at all about them could ever accuse president bill clinton of demonstrating bias or prejudice against islam. he sent troops to protect .uslims in eastern europe

whether we agree or disagree that it was appropriate use of ,merican troops, american lives werent american lives that lost to help muslims. all the while president clinton as commander in chief was helping -- trying to help muslims. there were radical islamic who were plotting and planning an incredibly egregious and heinous act, an attack against the united states of america. and that was before anybody ever used the words like jihad, adical islam, or al qaeda. there's an article my staff calls to my attention that was

posted last night, washington aminer, an editorial, posted april 25, at 9:00 p.m., washington examiner, the title of their editorial -- op-ed is, how the f.b.i. was blinded by political correctness. it says, as the initial elation over the swift identification and the ending of the brothers' manhood fades, a steady stream of facts are emerging that strongly suggests the need for a more sober assessment of the f.b.i.'s performance in the two years prior to the boston arathon bombing. f.b.i. counchter terrorism agents interviewed tamerlan, the older of the brothers, in january of 2011, after receiving

intelligence.sian since interviewing agents thought they heard nothing to indicate tsarnaev was a terrorist, little else was done and the case was closed for two months, until two months later. a few months later that he went to russia and experienced something that apparently prompted him to become quite open in his devotion -- about his devotion to radical vision of islamic jihad. the f.b.i. visited him a second time after he returned to the united states but again concluded that he was not a threat. it is speculation now, of course, but it's difficult to believe they would have been able to carry out the bombing had they been under active surveillance before the 203 boston -- 2013 boston marathon. before i continue with this editorial, i see i have a friend

-- do you wish time? all right. the editorial from the washington examiner goes on. it says, whatever else may yet be discovered what the f.b.i. missed, there is no excuse for the agency not grasping the significance of the radical islamist video tamerlan posted on his facebook page nighted, quote, the emergence of prophecy, the black flags of koercon, unquote. the video explains and glorifies the prophecy of a mighty jihadist army rising from the iranian region of the near east to conquer the world and establish an enduring muslim empire.

the connection is a tapele of al qaeda ideology and the video's presence ontsarnaev's facebook was a red flag that should have alerted agents to a very real potential danger. it is quite possible, though, the f.b.i. agents who interviewed him on both occasions failed to understand what they saw and heard because that's what they were trained to do. as the washington examiner reported last year, f.b.i. training manuals were systematically purged in 2011 of all references to islam that were judged offensive by a specially created five member panel. three of the panel members were muslim advocates from outside

the f.b.i. which still refuses to make public their identities. nearly 900 pages were removed from the manuals as a result of the review. several congressmen were allowed to review the removed materials in 2012 on condition that they not disclose what they read to the staffs, media, or general public. the washington examiner editorial goes on, says, with the recent proliferations of revelations about f.b.i. blindness of the brothers' tsarnaev, a comment made last year by representative louie gohmert, republican of texas, now has a tragic resonance. they quote me in the article.

we've got material being removed more because of political correctness than in the interest of proof and properly educated justice officials. we are blinding our enforcement officers from the ability to see who the enemy actually is. unquote. the boston bombing showed the tragic consequences of that blindness. this is an op-ed from yesterday by washington examiner quoting me from over a year ago, and in ct on february 16, 2012, i gave a speech from right here on the house floor, it was recorded, where i talked about this very issue, and something f assistance was a poster.

this poster points out the terminology that was used in the 9/11 commission report. it was in that 9/11 commission report before this administration took over and implemented political correctness, the 9/11 commission didn't know they had to be politically correct in the terminology they used according to the new standards by the f.b.i., so he they refer to violent extremism three times. they refer to an enemy 39 times. they refer to jihad, 126 times. they use the word muslim 145 times. they refer to islam 322 times.

they refer to the muslim brotherhood five times. they refer to religious 65 times. they refer to a mosque four times, hezbollah two times, al , eda, 36 times, caliphate seven times, and shari'a twice. and it's etiony it see when it -- and it's easy to see when it comes to enemy, neither the national intelligence strategy under 2009, under this administration, nor the f.b.i. counterterrorism lexicon, the words that are allowed to be used by f.b.i. agents and their terminology, apparently it's ok to talk about violent