the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 301, a bill to provide for the establishment of the special envoy to promote religious freedom of religious minorities in the near east and south central asia. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule the gentleman from california, mr. royce, and the gentleman from new york, mr. meeks, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. royce: mr. speaker, i would ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and that they also might have the ability to include extraneous material on this resolution in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. royce: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i may consume. i rise in support of this legislation. because this legislation provides for a very needed special envoy to promote religious freedom for religious

minorities in the mideast and in south central asia. this bill, introduced by the gentleman from virginia, mr. woeful, is substantially -- mr. -- mr. unstan rble -- e-- is substance rblely in the time that's elapsed since then, the dangers have only grown more acute. in many areas of the mideast, the first freedom, as we called it, the freedom of religious liberty, is disregarded and minority communities are not merely under threat. those communities are now under attack. from afghanistan to iran to syria to egypt and elsewhere in these regions, religious minorities have been increasingly subjected to

unconscionable, often violence, persecution. these alarming trends are occurring in the midst of growing regional instability as brutal regimes and terrorists, insurgents, seek to assert control over populations and seek to enforce their ideology by use of fear. by use of brute force. as the bloody civil war rages in syria, ancient christian communities are being forced to flee the lands they have inhabited for centuries in the midst of this bloody civil conflict. in egypt, coptic christians have experienced unspeakable abuses at the hands of radical muslim groups and have been fleeing their country in droves to escape further violence. i have met with many from the vibrant coptic christian community in southern california.

in iran, more than 500 bhies have been arbitrary -- bahais have been arbitraryly arrested by the iranian government. in pakistan, 8 -- 0mens of a muslim sect were killed by terrorists in their places of worship in 2010, in addition to consistent incidents of violence and even judicial persecution of christians there, many of us are aware of the violations of the rights and the deaths of the shia minority there as well. for all of these alarming reasons, this legislation is at least as timely as it was two ars ago, and i commend our colleague, mr. wolf of virginia, for bringing it to our attention and i'm going to reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york.

mr. meeks: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in support of this bill and yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. meeks: this bipartisan legislation creates a special envoy to promote religious freedom of religious minorities in the near east and south central asia. housed at the state department, the special envoy would be responsible for monitoring and combating acts of religious intolerance, engaging with foreign governments to address laws that discriminate against religious minorities and working to ensure that the unique needs of religious minority communities are being addressed. this bill is important because religious minority communities all around the world, particularly in the near east and south central asia, are facing increased attacks and persecution. for example, egypt's recent government has failed to

prevent, investigate, or prosecute crimes against members of religious minority groups, especially coptic christians. churches have been burned to the ground and numerous christians murdered. iraq used to have a significant number of religious minorities. these groups have been subject to escalating violence, persecution, and discrimination for their religious beliefs and today, they comprise only about 3% of iraq's population. by some estimates, half of iraq's christian population has fled since 2003. in iran, the arrest and harassment of members of religious minorities, including sunni muslims and christians, continues to rise. and one notable case last year, an iranian american christian pastor was impressed for threatening iranian national security.

what was his crime? helping to set up small churches in people's homes. iran's minority bahai community is morely harassed, punished, imprisoned and even killed, simply because of their religion. this past august, a baha'i mmunity leader was found murdered in his car on the outskirts of the city, shot in the back of the head. he had been the subject of threats and pressures from agents of the ministry of intelligence and until shortly before his death he had been receiving menacing phone calls from an unidentified person. there's little doubt that his murder was religiously motivated. until now, the iranian government has not begun a formal investigation into his murder or the murder of many other baha'i that have been killed in recent pastime for th

government to move immediately to seek justice for the cruel deaths of its baha'i citizens. i wish these were isolated case bus countless other cases exist, from afghanistan to india to saudi arabia. we indeed are fortunate to live in a country that was funned by religious refugees on principles of tolerance. but it's important we do everything we can to ensure that religious minorities elsewhere in the world enjoy the freedoms and protections they deserve. the freedoms and protections enjoyed by all americans. appointing this special envoy will be an important step in that direction and i urge my colleagues to support this bill. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california.

mr. royce: i yield five minutes to the gentleman from virginia, mr. wolf, co-chairman of the tom lantos human rights foundation, long a spokesman of religious freedom for those of all crowds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. wolf: i want to begin by thanking chairman royce for swiftly moving the bill and for his comments today and thank the republican leadership for recognizing that this simple but critical legislation is worthy of being made a priority by this congress even with the other issues it faces at this time. in january, 2011, following attacks against christians in iraq, i convened a tom lantos human rights commission hearing of sing on the plight

religious minorities tpwh the mideast. we heard sobering testimony bout the problems facing these communities. coptic christians were being marginalized and targeted for violence. these realities with -- realities were even more troubling given the roots of these religious communities. to in the area continue speak aramaic, the language of jesus. their plight was largely unknown and seemed unimportant to the larger international community. while the hearing predated the so-called ashe spring, without questioning -- the so-called arab spring. i was convinced then and remane convinced today that religious minorities in the mideast and key countries in south central

asia, pakistan, afghanistan, need someone who can be their voice within the halls of foggy bottom. last congress this legislation overwhelmingly passed the house only to stall in the senate in the face of opposition by the state department, the same state department which to date has failed to designate any countries of particular concern for egregious religious freedom violations since august of 201 1. the administration's opposition is shortsighted and frankly indefensible. as we debate this legislation, coptic christians are leaving egypt in droves. as we debate this legislation, seven baha'i leaders languish unjustly in iranian prisons. we debate this legislation, ahmadine muslims in pakistan are prohibited from voting and their graves are desecrated.

syrian christians fear they too will be caught in the cross fire like iraqi christians or worse yet like the iraqi jewish community. i'm told only a single jewish person remains in the country today where once a jewish community flour herbed. this measure is supported by organizations, e united methodist church, the diaspora organizations. will a special envoy guarantee these communities' survival and flourishing? i don't know. but doing nothing is not an option. on this administration's watch we watch the mideast emptied of ancient faith community. german luther pastor detrick bonhoeffer, faced with the

tyranny of nazrism famously said, silence in the face of evil is itself evil, to not speak is to speak, to not act, is an act. in america, the shining city on a hill envisioned by our founders will not be silent in the face of evil. vote yes on h.r. 301. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. meeks: at this time i'm happy to yield three minutes to the co-author of the bill, the gentlelady from california, ms. anna eshoo. the chair: -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for three minutes. ms. eshoo: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to begin by thanking the ranking member. i also want to thank the chairman of the committee and most especially to my colleague

and friend, congressman wolf. mr. speaker, i rise today in strong support of h.r. 301, a bill that will create a special envoy to promote religious freedom of religious minorities in the near east and southeast asia. south asia. this legislation responds as has been said, so eloquently, of those that spoke before me, to the urgent needs of christians and other religious minorities who are really under siege in the mideast, precisely because they are christians and because they are minorities. in light of the ongoing events in syria, this legislation could not be more timely. i commend representative frank wolf, who i worked closely with as co-share of the religious minorities caucus, and for his partnership in this effort. most importantly, i thank him

for his conscience. we first introduced this legislation in 2011, after congressman wolf chaired a hearing to review the violence and hardship faced by middle eastern religious minorities. i testified that day about the plight of who i am descended from, the assyrians, the world's oldest christians, who have and continue to flee iraq. we agreed to press forward with this legislation to create a special envoy at the state department. the ambassador level. to elevate this issue for the attention that it deserves. we need, the united states of america needs, a high level official dedicated to religious freedom in the region, committed to addressing the concerns of minority communities. appropriately, h.r. 31 has

attracted solid, bipartisan support. with 6 co-sponsors calling for the state department to elevate religious freedom in the mideast as a diplomatic priority of our country. just as senator john danforth served our nation as special envoy to sudan and senator george mitchell special envoy to northern ireland, religious minorities in the mideast require and deserve a high level, authoritative voice to address their situation. the history of violence against christians in the mideast must not be allowed to repeat itself, and it is. notably syria's ancient christian population which makes up 10% of the country has been forced to flee their ancestral homeland. churches and -- as noted in today's "new york times" in a lengthy article. churches have been and continue

to be -- i'd like to request another minute, please. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. shall ue: thank you. i think you said two. churches continue to be attacked and sacred objects ransack and the very lives of those that stand against this being threatened. the christians of syria as well as iraq, iran, israel and egypt are the oldest in the world. christianity was from the beginning a middle eastern religion. e syrian christians actually celebrate mass in arameic, which jesus spoke. christianity has been part of the middle eastern community. from the founding of our nation, religious freedom has been a pillar of our democracy and it remains one of the great hallmarks of our country.

i urge all my colleagues to join me in supporting this critical legislation to create a special enjoy focused on the freedom and survival of the -- of these ancient faith communities. and i thank representtively wolf, most especially, for his tireless advocacy. i also thank the u.s. conference of catholic bishops for supporting this legislation and for writing to every member of the house urging their full support as well as the honor roll of faith-based organizations who support the legislation. let us go forward and send a very clear message, not only to the other body, other legislative body, but also to people around the world that we remain the beacon of hope and light and in a we uphold this pillar of religious freedom not only in our own nation but in countries around the world

where people of faith are under siege. and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. royce: i'm just going to reserve the right to close, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. meeks: thank you, mr. speaker. and we'll close. let me thank the authors of this bill, mr. wolf, ms. eshoo, for your dedication, your focus and your hard work. it would seem that in the year of our lord, 2013, we would learn religious tolerance by now all over the world. we would have learned it is the ight thing to do to be patient that those who believe different than we do, to allow them to pray in their own

beliefs. unfortunately, that's not true. and for all of us we should be concerned wherever religious adhered to. not for i am recalling the words and why it concerns us, dr. king said once that injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere. and so if we allow minorities who believe differently than we do anywhere to think that it is ok and we're not going to use whatever diplomatic or other forms of relationships that we have to try to have religious freedoms, they're mistake hehn. we must not allow our -- mistaken. we must not allow our voices t be silent. we must speak and allow in clear language and i urge my colleagues to support this

bill. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. royce: well, thank you, and i think, mr. speaker, in the spirit that mr. meeks articulated there, we americans who cherish religious liberty and all people of good will who value the rights of conscience cannot remain silent in the face of this rising regional intolerance, and i think, as he put it, and as mr. wolf and ms. anna eshoo put so eloquently, i think it is time to bring about deploy in l envoy to the middle east. and i thank mr. wolf for his leadership and certainly urge passage of h.r. 301. and i'll yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields. the question is will the house

suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 301 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative -- mr. wolf: mr. chairman, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from virginia. 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. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this otion will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move to suspend the rules and pass s. 793, senate bill 793 as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of

the bill. the clerk: senate 793, an act to support revitalization and reform of the organization of american states, and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from california, mr. royce, and the gentleman from new york, mr. meeks, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. royce: well, thank you, mr. speaker. i am going to ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and to include any extraneous material on this measure in the record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. royce: so i'll at this time ield myself such time as i may consume, mr. speaker and to explain that this legislation would require the secretary of state to develop a multiyear strategy to bolster the organization of american states, o.a.s. as we know it, and to improve the performance

and the process for managing the budget and the personnel at the o.a.s. when it was founded in 1948, it was the sole multilateral body in the western hemisphere. as the premiere hemispheric organization, the o.a.s.'s key institutional documents is charter, the american declaration of rights, the interamerican democratic charter, enshrined values that are the foundation for political systems in the americas. since its founding, the o.a.s. has accepted too many mandates from its member states resulting in a loss of international focus and in turn has reduced frankly the organization's effectiveness. and this bill seeks to push the o.a.s. to refocus on those two core principles, promoting democratic governance and institutions and resolving the regional disputes. this push comes as other

regional bodies are competing with o.a.s. for regional influence. there is the central american system of integration, the union of south american nations and the community of latin america and caribbean states which includes cuba, but excludes both the united states and canada. many of these political bodies do not represent our values. most exclude the u.s. many are used by governments in the region to undermine the o.a.s. thus undermining u.s. diplomacy in this hemisphere. in order to maintain the o.a.s. as an influential positive force and to defend the u.s. engagement, it is important that the u.s. spearhead an effort to reform the o.a.s. and address its many administrative challenges. and this bill calls on the administration to develop a strategy that helps the o.a.s. focus on its core mission, shed nonessential programs, install

a results-based budgeting process and adopt transparent, competitive personnel practices. additionally, the bill was strengthened in committee to recognize it is not politically or financially viable for any o.a.s. member state, including the united states, to pay more than 50% of the institution's assessed fees. i reserve the balance of my ime. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york. mr. meeks: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of s. 793, as amended, and yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman. mr. meeks: mr. speaker, the o.a.s. remains the premiere regional forum for the countries of the americas to conduct multilateral business, an important aspect of u.s. relations with its neighbors.

the bill before us today seeks to support the organization, particularly with respect to democracy promotion and the rotection of human rights. the version we are poised to pass today, introduced by the senator from new jersey, bob menendez, the chairman of the senate foreign affairs committee. this new provision requires of the state to examine ways to ensure that the future of o.a.s. member states pays no more than 50% of the regular budget. currently, based on legacy fee structure from a different era, the u.s. does pay more than 50% with a series of distorting results. modernizing this would -- the

- in the spirit of consensus and partnership. i'd like to thank ranking -- i'd like to thank chairman royce and ranking member engel for working truly again as we have done and seen time and time again on the foreign affairs committee really working in a bipartisan manner on this bill and we know that sometimes it's not easy but they have managed to do it and i thank them for that and i urge my colleagues to support it. and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. royce: well, i'd just like to thank mr. meeks. i'm also going to ask, mr. speaker, at this time for unanimous consent to yield to the gentlelady from florida the balance of my time and that she be able to control that time. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. royce: thank you, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida is recognized. ms. ros-lehtinen: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself such time as i

may consume. i thank our esteemed chairman for this privilege to speak about an important bill before us and i'd like to commend senator bob menendez, my dear friend, from new jersey for introducing this pivotal bill, an important bipartisan bill to bring desperately needed reforms to this failed organization of american states. i remain deeply disappointed, mr. speaker, that the o.a.s. ontinues to live up to the principles of the interamerican democratic charter. not .a.s. should be but is an important regional body that stands up for democratic principles, that promotes the rule of law, that condemns human rights violations. however, the o.a.s. has strayed, and this bill is a positive step forward to bring

it back onto the right path. throughout the region, mr. speaker, we have seen nations to ignore their own constitution and deprive their people of the most basic human rights. has the o.a.s. spoken out against the illegitimate elections in venezuela? w about the illegit mate elections in anything rag with a? or what about the continued human rights abuses against the people of cuba? just this past sunday, mr. speaker, more than 30 pro-democracy advocates who were peacefully gathering in cuba were detained and beaten by agents of the regime for doing nothing, but the o.a.s. remain silent on all these important topics, and in doing so it fails to hold accountable the authoritarian regimes that oppress millions in our own

hemisphere. that is why real and concrete reforms are needed at the o.a.s. right now. i fully support this legislation because it strengthens our mission at the o.a.s. and it ensures that u.s. taxpayer dollars are used well and no longer go to waste as they are at the o.a.s. right now. thank you, mr. speaker. with that i reserve the balance of my time. he speaker pro tempore: the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves, the gentleman from new york is recognized. mr. meeks: we have no further speakers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. meeks: thank you, mr. chairman, mr. speaker. let me just state again about the hard work that chairman royce and rank -- ranking member engel, working in a bipartisan manner, to get this

bill done. it's difficult at times when you have different views on different issues, but i think that when you have individuals working together across the aisle, trying to come up with the appropriate compromise for an organization that is needed to have the strength to protect human rights, to make sure there's democracy, working together to get them on the right track as mr. royce has indicated is important. to also have the other body, the senate, working with us so it's bicameral is a tremendous effort, i think, on both sides and trying to make sure that we have an organization in our hemisphere that is doing the right thing. and we've got to do it on a continuing basis, being sturdy, being resourceful, but also being bipartisan. so as i yield back the balance

of my time, let me just finally say that the manner in which this bill has come together is the manner in which i wish many bills could come together on this floor and working with the other body. i urge all of my colleagues to support this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. ros-lehtinen: in closing, i want to thank our esteemed chairman, mr. ed royce of california, our committee's ranking member, mr. eliot engel of new york, for their work on this bipartisan, bicameral effort to take one step, just the first step, at deep o.a.s. reform. we want to thank senator bob

menendez, the author of the bill, who has been a longtime supporter and leader in favor of human right the rule of law and democracy, especially in our hemisphere. all of us in our committee look forward to working with senator menendez and all of our members in the other body as well as we move forward to enact this bill and make sure that we have the true, meaningful reforms and endeavor to get the o.a.s. once again focused back on their core mission, which should be and remain promoting democracy and human rights in the americas, a mission from which it has strayed far too often including up to today. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields. the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass senate 793?

those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. -- as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 being in the affirmative -- ms. ros-lehtinen: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida. ms. ros-lehtinen: on that, i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise and remain standing until counted. a sufficient number having risen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this otion will be postponed.

for what purpose does the gentleman from kentucky seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill h.r. 3092. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of he bill. does the gentleman seek to pass the bill as amended? >> i move that the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: h.r. 092. a bill to amend -- h.r. 3092, a bill to amend the missing children's assistance act and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from kentucky, mr. guthrie, and the gentlewoman from florida, mrs. wilson, each will control 20 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from kentucky. mr. guthrie: i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks on

h.r. 3092. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. guthrie: i rise today in strong support of h.r. 3092 and yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. guthrie: mr. speaker, as a father of three chern, i can't imagine the horror if one of my children were missing or in harm's way. just like any other parent, the thought is unthinkable and one i'm thankful to have never experienced. my first exposure to the issues faced by at-risk populations such as those authorized under law was as a cadet at west point in new york city. there was a shelter in new york children. meless many were abused and neglected and had no home to return to. approximately 80% of children reported missing are in fact

categorized as endangered runaways. these vulnerable kids deserve help. my bill, h.r. 3092, will re-authorize the missing children's assistance act. at current funding levels. re-authorizing this critical law will ensure that coordination of state and local law enforcement efforts to identify, locate and return missing, abducted and sexually exploited children continues. we cannot afford to wait. the world around us, while often kind and beautiful, can also be cruel and ugly. it's through the work of groups like the national center for missing and exploited children that resources are available to those in dire need. chances are that you've seen a hotline come across your tv screen looking to collect information about miss -- a missing child. but i have never thought about the infrastructure behind these efforts. this legislation seeks to re-authorize these critical programs and ensure no gap in

access for the children, families, and communities in need. since its founding in 1984, the center, while partnered with local law enforcement has helped recover more than 188,000 missing children across the united states. april 9, 2014, marks the 3th anniversary of the justice department awarding the first national clearinghouse grant to the center. just two months after its creation new york june of 1984, president reagan celebrated the official opening of the center at a white house ceremony, praising this model of public-private partnership which has fulfilled his vision for three decades. i applaud the efforts of chairman kline, representative walberg and my fellow committee members for understanding the importance of this legislation and helping to move it forward. i urge my colleagues to support h.r. 3092 so we can continue to support these vital programs. i reserve the balance of my ime.

the speaker pro tempore: the chair recognizes the gentlelady from florida. mrs. wilson: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield myself as much time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized. mrs. wilson: i rise in strong support of h.r. 3092, the missing children's assistance re-authorization act of 2013. this bill will be named after former congressman e. clay shaw, a defender of children's rights from my state of florida who recently passed away. since its inception in 1984, the missing children's assistance act has helped identify and recover millions of exploited children across our nation. now that it's due to expire at the end of this month, i urge

my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to re-authorize this critical legislation that protects society's most vulnerable citizens, our precious children. we have made progress, we now have the national center for missing and exploited chern and we now have the amber alert. but we still have so much work to do. there are still too many tragic cases of children being abducted, raped, sexually abused and murdered. as a parent, grandparent, elementary schoolteacher and school principal, i was deeply shaken when a beautiful 4-year-old girl in the custry -- custody of the foster care system went missing in my own community. she was missing for two years before anyone even knew it.

she has never been found. her disappearance exposed many of the shortcomings of the department of children and families in my home state of florida. one of the most troubling aspects of her case was the fact that she had been withdrawn from preschool. no one, no one gave the foster parent permission to withdraw her. if she were still in school, there would have been so many eyes watching. teachers, parents, and her peers. if she were still in school, somebody would have known that she was missing. if this bill were in place, she would have been saved by nsible procedures, h.r. 3092 dds commons -- commonsense coordination and oversight

provision to protect foster youth. it updates the law that provides federal support for the national center for missing and exploited children. the center which heads national efforts to locate and return missing children to their families. they help stop kidnappings and sexual exploitation of young people nationwide. they staff 24 hour a day, seven day a week call lines to both recover missing children and report child exploitation. since its inception in 1984, he center has received 210,162 calls for missing children or an average of 548 per day. 3.7 as responded to over million calls overall. thanks to the center's call

hotline, the vast majority of missing children have been recovered quickly. second and specific to the case i mentioned, h.r. 3092 requires the national center to help law enforcement work with child welfare agencies to respond to missing foster children. foster children continue to go missing at much higher rates than their peers. and their disappearances tend to go unreported for much longer periods of time. under h.r. 3092, law enforcement agencies must notify the national center of each report received relating to missing children from foster care. this re-authorization also requires that federal resources support training and technical steants of law enforcement to work effectively with public schools to identify and recover

missing children. in a sense, law enforcement in preventing and recovering missing children with disabilities. h.r. 3092 improves current efforts of the center to identify, locate and recover victims of child sex trafficking. it also directs the center to raise awareness about prevention and educational services for programs that support homeless youth who are at significant and increasing risk of social and sexual exploitation. i'm delighted to see democrats and republicans come together to stand up, stand up strong, for missing and exploited children. i'd like to thank chairman kline and his staff for their

efforts in working with ranking member miller and his staff. i'd like to thank the nonprofit advocates and the bipartisan senate staff in developing this legislation to re-authorize the missing children's assistance act. for me, this is personal. t is about a little girl named rilyah wilson a foster child born to a drug-addicted mother. it's about her legacy and the legacies of so many foster ildren who suffer for -- who suffer. for all of us, this should be a simple and sensible way to honor our children and protect society east most vulnerable citizens. this is a great day in the

house of representatives. thank you and i reserve the balance of my time, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from kentucky. mr. guthrie: thank you, mr. speaker. i appreciate the strong words and support of my good friend from florida. i appreciate that very much. now i'd like to yield to the chairman of the work force -- ed and work force committee, the gentleman from minnesota, my friend, mr. kline. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized for three minutes. mr. kline: i thank you, mr. speaker. and i thank the gentleman from kentucky for yielding the time and for introducing this important legislation. mr. speaker, i rise in very strong support today of h.r. 3092, the e. clay shaw jr. missing children's assistance re-authorization act of 2013. mr. speaker, h.r. 3092 will help prevent the abduction and sexual exploitation of children. since 1984, the national center

for missing and exploited children has worked with the department of justice to build a coordinated, a coordinated national system to aid the recovery of missing children, protect children from sexual child tion and promote safety and crime prevecks. over the last three decades, the center has assisted law enforcement in finding thousands of missing children, and its success rate has grown from 62% in 1990 to 76% today. and through its cybertip line, the center has received for investigation more than two million reports of crimes against children. this bill will ensure the national center can continue its work on behalf of our most vulnerable citizens while also taking steps to protect taxpayers through enhanced accountability and oversight. additionally, the legislation supports greater coordination between law enforcement and states, districts and schools in the race to recover missing

children. furthermore, the e. clay shaw jr. missing children's assistance re-authorization act includes language from a bill authored by my colleague from michigan, mr. tim walberg, that will strengthen the center's work with law enforcement to rescue victims of sex trafficking. mr. speaker, this is a good bill. it helps protect and defend america's children and their families. i applaud and thank mr. guthrie for his work on this legislation and i strongly urge my colleagues to lend their support and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from florida. ms. wilson: is the gentleman from kentucky prepared to close? mr. guthrie: i am, mr. speaker, i am prepared to close. i have no further speakers. i am prepared to close. ms. wilson: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the chair recognizes the gentleman from kentucky. mr. guthrie: thank you, mr. speaker.

again, as my friend from florida said, what -- able to work together, house and senate, republicans and democrats for a very important issue. i just want to thank my colleagues here speaking to the importance of h.r. 3092, the e. clay shaw jr. missing children's assistance re-authorization act of 2013. the national center for missing and exploited children has assisted law enforcement in the 188,389 of more than missing children since it was founded in 1984. as of june, 2013, the center's toll free 24-hour call center received more than 3.8 million calls. re-authorizing this law will ensure that the critical coordination of state and local enforcement efforts by the center on behalf of missing, abducted and sexual exploited children continues. i'm honored to take the lead on this important issue and ask my colleagues to support this bill so we can continue these vital

programs. again, thanks for both sides working together, and 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. 3092 as amended. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, 2/3 having responded in the affirmative -- mr. guthrie: mr. speaker, i request 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. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, further proceedings on this otion will be postponed. the chair lays before the house a message. the clerk: to the congress of the united states, pursuant to

section 233-e-1 of the social security act, as amended, by the social security amendments of 1977, the social security act, i transmit herewith an agreement on social security between the united states of america and the slovak republic, the united states-slovak total agreement. the agreement consists of two separate instruments, a principle agreement an an administrative agreement. it was brought about on december 10, 2012. the united states-slovak republic total organization agreement is similar in the objective to the social security totalization agreements already enforced with most european union countries, as you trail yarks canada, chile, japan, norway and the republic of korea. such bilateral agreements provide for limited coordination between the united states and foreign social security systems to eliminate

duo social security coverage and taxation and to help prevent thes lost benefit protection that can occur when workers divide their careers between two countries. e united states-slovak total agreement contains all provisions in section 233 of the social security act and other provisions i deep appropriate to carry out the section 233 pursuant to section 2 3-c-4 of the social security act. i also transmit for the information of the congress a report prepared by the social security administration explaining the key points of united states-slovak republic totalization agreement, along with a paragraph by paragraph explanation of the provisions of the principle agreement and administrative arrangement. annexed to this report is another report required by section 233-e-1 of the social security act on the effect of the united states-slovak

republic totalization agreement on income and expenditures of the u.s. social security program and the number of individuals affected by the united states-slovak republic totalization agreement. signed, barack obama, the white house. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the committee on ways and means and ordered printed. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the house until approximately 6:30 p.m. today. >> the house is expected back in this evening at 6:30 eastern for votes and speeches. later in the week, members will work on a forest management measure and a bill that would revise the food stamp program. also possible, a resolution to keep the federal government funded past the end of the month. our live coverage of the house will continue at 6:30 eastern. here more about the food stamp program expected to come up on

thursday in the house. >> house republicans are planning on taking up a revised nutrition assistance bill late they are week. we're joined by derek walberg, congress reporter for bloomberg news. what's going to be in this bill? >> it's going to be most of what was in the nutrition title from the last time the republicans brought up a combined food and farm bill. they went last time with 20.-- with $20.5 billion in cuts to nutrition spending but this time it's about double that. the congressional budget office says we're in store for about $39 billion in cuts over -- compared to c.b.o.'s 10-year baseline. what that means is that state work requirements that can be waived can't be waived as much. it means that we're looking at some restrictions on eligibility programs. because it's not like with this bill you just say, i want to

cut this amount of money. what it is instead is you say, well, we want to change these eligibility requirements and that leads to a certain amount of cuts. this is a contrast, this is about almost 10 times as much of a cut as the senate has in their nutrition portion of their farm bill, this is quite a gulf with what we've seen come earlier. >> you mentioned this time versus last time. take us back. why was this nutrition part of it, which used to be called the food stamp portion, why was it separated out from the farm bill? >> well, let's go really, really far back. this originally came up in sort a he 1960's, 1970's, and little bit before as a coalition deal to get farm spending through. you'd have urban votes for farm policy, you'd have rural votes for food stamp programs. and 1973, get the nutrition

title added, 1977, you're seeing food stamps more in their current form as more of a welfare style policy, free aid rather than increasing purchasing power. so really this is an alliance that surpassed farm policy for quite a long time. fast forward to this summer and you had a bill come up with $20.5 billion over 10 years in food stamp cuts that fell on the house floor. it was a stunning rejection. democrats who thought they cut way too much thought that republican amendments at at the last second were too much. they didn't want to go for them. they cleeved off en masse and there wasn't sufficient republican support including from some people who said look, this doesn't cut enough system of house republican leaders went back to the drawing board, they looked -- worked through august and said, look, we're

going to try to pass something with republican-only support. and the republican-only support means that we're going to have to cut more than we were doing before. now there's a republican argument that says, look, there's a lot of waste in the system. there are people who are getting these benefits that don't need them. the example you're going to hear a lot in this debate is of somebody in california, a surfer in california was in a memo that i saw that's being passed around, using food stamps for lobster. you'll see talks about lottery winners included in a previous version. that's back again. banning lottery winners like one in michigan from having food stamps. you'll see those sorts of concerns. battling up against democrats who say, look, you're going to kick people off of food stamps who need it. they're going to say that the rise in food stamp spending is due to the recession, that of

course there are more people on food stamps now than threrp in 2008 because the economy is worse and it's a simple one to one. congressional budget office forecasts a decline in food stamps, in food stamp recipients regardless of what happens. the question here is should we stay at that level or should we go much, much more. >> looking ahead to the senate, will the senate take up this bill if it passes the house? >> i talked to debbie stab gnaw today about -- stabenow today about that, i said, would you take this if it were in conference? she said absolutely not. senate democrats don't want to see this, they didn't like cutting food stamps from the farm bill in the first place. they don't like that this is a three-year authorization. farm bill is written as a phi-year authorization. if that goes forward, it could lead to a permanent divorce of food stamps from the farm bill. that's a policy they do not

want to see. so there are many things in here that senate democrats find objectionable and you will hear house derms advancing their arguments -- democrats -- house democrats advancing their arguments on thursday. >> congress reporter for bloomberg news, thank you. >> thanks for having me. >> the bill we just heard about is expected to come up on thursday. house minority leader steny hoyer spoke earlier today about the economy and the upcoming debate over the debt ceiling and about larry somers dropping out of consideration for fed chairman. here's what he said. >> we saw larry somers withdraw his name from consideration over the weekend, by all accounts he was the administration's first choice, the president's first choice for chairman of the fed.

do you think it was the right thing for larry somers to do to pull his name out of consideration? and obviously you're on the house side but do you think had he gone up to the senate he could have been confirmed? >> i don't know the answer to the second question. there was obviously controversy. have had the opportunity of i have had the opportunity to work with him both when he was undersecretary and as secretary , found him to be extraordinarily competent, knowledgeable, respected and i know the president relied heavily on him for economic advice and felt strongly about his capabilities. i've not talked to larry somers but my conclusion is that he decided that the controversy that would be surrounding the confirmation or his appointment would undermine the confidence that we need to have in the federal reserve and so i think in a very responsible way he

made a determination that he did not want to further politicize or create controversy within the federal reserve. so i think he probably did the right thing, certainly from his perspective. but he's a person of immense and will continue to contribute. >> do you think fed vice chair is the best pick for the president now that somers is out of contention or are there other candidates? >> i think she would be an excellent appointee. i think that she enjoys wide respect. i think she would be somebody who would be confidence-building of the federal reserve. but there are others as well and this is of course a choice the president is going to make. and i would hope that he would make it relatively soon so that we could stabilize because i think that given the other economic turmoil we're going to talk about, having the federal reserve as a stable, respected

institution that gives confidence to the marketplace is very important. >> do you think the administration has taken too long in making this appointment? one of the arguments from folks who are supportive of larry somers is had they moved more quickly, some of the opposition would not have coalesced and he could have gotten through the senate faster. are we at a stabilizing point where this nomination, not having been made, is having a negative iment pact on the economy? >> i certainly think at this point in time making this appointment as soon as possible will be helpful. yeah. >> now, with part of minority reporters, -- remarks, you can see all of his comments after the house goes out here on c-span and any time at c-span.org. the house is expected back in a little less than a half hour from now for votes on measures debated earlier. until then we'll hear about the role the united nations will play in the coming days regarding syria. from this morning's "washington journal."

>> the united nations opens its 68th session today. joining us now to talk about the u.n., including its role in syria is susan glasser. editor of "politico" magazine. lease start with that u.n. report on chemical weapons use in syria that was just released yesterday. guest: clearly it's a significant moment. this is the first time there's been an independent confirmation both of the use of chemical weapons, the scale of the killing, there are details about how the weapons were fired. the mandate was not to come to a definitive conclusion as far as cultivating who fired the weapons. it's very interesting to see the immediate reaction. we have the united states and partners like france saying this proves that the syrian government of assad was the one that fired the weapons. you have the russians

immediately, despite the deal the other day with the united states, you have the russians immediately saying, well, we believe actually it was the rebel troops, but the united states and its partners have cited their own findings, in addition to that in the report to say that there's fairly overwhelming evidence to suggest these were fired by the government. host: let's talk about the evidence and the conclusions that were in that actual report. when you mentioned the report earlier today, for our viewers, but here's reading straight from the u.n. report which you can also find on c-span's website. the conclusions of that report note that on the basis of the evidence obtained during our investigation --

host: the report goes on to note that the results leave us with the deepest concerns. what evidence in there is the u.s. pointing to when they come to their conclusion that this shows that it was the government? guest: in particular the united states has cited the fact that these were the kind of weapons that need to be under the command and control of an organized military in order to be fired. this is not the kind of capability that the united states assesses that the rebels have at this moment. in addition, they believe and the report cites where the trajectory of the rockets, to say they were coming from government-held positions and hat the rebels went into rebel-held territory. so what certainly would suggest to be an overwhelming amount of circle evidence to suggest the government in there.

been a king moon has not suggested -- ban kim moon has not assigned exact responsibility for these. he did use the release of the report yesterday to call this a war crime explicitly and to point out that this is the most serious use of a weapon of mass destruction in the 21st century. host: we're talking about susan glasser, "politico" magazine editor about the u.n. and its role in syria right now and the challenges facing the u.n. our phone lines are open. democrats can call in 202-585-3880. republicans, 202-585-3881, independents, 202-585-3882 and if you're ude the u.s. it's 20 it-585-388. while you're dialing in, want to show you yesterday, u.s. ambassador to the u.n., samantha, responded to the release of that u.n. inspector's report that we've been talking about. today i want to play you a bit

of what she said. >> as you've already heard, from the secretary general, and from my colleague, ambassador lyle grant, the u.n. report confirms unmistakeably the chemical weapons were used in syria on august 21. now, the mandate of the chemical weapons team was, as you well know, not to investigate culpability but the technical details of the u.n. report make clear that only the regime could have carried out this largescale chemical weapons attack. we will analyze the u.n.'s findings in greater detail very carefully. but based on our preliminary review, i will note one particular observation. we have associated one type of munitions cited in the u.n. 122-millimeter rockets, with previous regime attacks. we have reviewed thousands of open-source videos related to the current conflict in syria

and have not observed the opposition manufacturing or using this style of rocket. in addition, and i just want to underscore something that ambassador lyle grant shared, it was noted in response to a question from russia that the quality of the cerin was higher than that of the cerin used in saddam hussein's program. host: we're talking with susan glasser, editor of "politico" magazine about the u.n. and its work in syria. we're talking about this chemical weapons report. where does this go from here? what happens now? guest: that is a very good question because of course just this past weekend the united states and russia came to an agreement under which they would require syria over a fairly rapid period both to disclose all of its chemical weapons and then to submit to international inspection with the goal of removing that chemical weapons arsenal over the next six months.

as quickly as possible. it's a very ambitious schedule and of course it's both a very significant agreement but one fraught with a lot of potential roadblocks along the way. it's not clirle clear, as you saw yesterday, the u.s. and russia had wildly different interpretations of this u.n. report. that the two parties that came together to agree that syria should give up its chemical weapons, account united states nd russia continue to work together on this or there be points where they are immediately disagreing, whether syria is in good faith honoring the agreement or whether it's just buying for time. there's a lot of real questions about the implementation of this agreement. host: talk about what that agreement asks of the u.n. in the coming months and perhaps years. guest: well, look, the united nations has in the past and i think again will be called upon -- the main guaranteor

guarantor, asking them to go into a very dangerous situation on the ground with a raging civil war, to verify not only the size and scale of this chemical weapons arsenal that assad, after denying for years, has now acknowledged that he has and said he's going to give it up, but will the inspectors be able to find all the chemical weapons? will they be able to ensure that we have a clear sense of their chain of custody as they are being eliminated? and then of course the destruction of chemical weapons is an enormous, elaborate, complicated and time-consuming process. host: is the u.n. up to the task? do they have the funding and the staffing and the resources to carry out all those things along which it's other missions its currently being asked to do? guest: the united nations has some real expertise in this area of weaponings -- weapons monitoring and in particular of overseeing destruction of chemical weapons. obviously the united states and

russia, i should point out that actually the u.s. and russia presented a model for corporation -- cooperation in the aftermath of the collapse of the soviet union. the u.s. and russia worked successfully together over years on monitoring and destruction of chemical weapons. i visited many years ago the main chemical weapons destruction facility in russia which even two decades by the way after the end of the cold war, they were still hard at work dismantling these weapons. that's how long it takes. it's a very elaborate process. host: what kinds of weapons were they doing there? the certain gas? guest: it was that along with other kinds of chemical weapons. host: u.n. peace keeping efforts around the country, peace keeping at the u.n. is supported by 193 member states. the u.n. currently has 16 missions across four continents right now. the largest mission right now is in darfur, about 26,000, 27,000 personnel are in partnership with the african

union there in darfur. that mission was established in 2007. we're going to go to the phones now to chat with susan glasser, the editor of "politico" magazine. give us a call. phone lines are open. tom is waiting from columbia, maryland, on our democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. thank you. thank you very much for taking my call. the ust confused as far as back and forth, back and forth rhetoric. if we're going to rely on the united nations as far as their conclusions and they will not submit to say who exactly is responsible, then why are we using circumstantial evidence to be so sure? the targets that we would have would not be based on circumstantial surveillance.

guest: i think the caller is sort of concerning two different things. there's the question of whether there will be future military action and what kind of targetsing and intelligence would be used on that right now. president obama has said he's going to hold off on that in order to give this diplomaticsy and this negotiated agreement a chance to work. so that's one bucket of issues that you face here. then the other question is, well, if the u.n. reports didn't conclude and wasn't set up to conclude who was guilty in this chemical weapons attack, you know, where do we look for our definitive answer? the united states and its allies have said they have what they believe to be evidence beyond their own doubt about the guilty of the assad regime in this circumstance. but the russians continue to be fairly effective advocates on behalf of the syrian government , at least in muddying the waters. there's at least raising a

question out there about the guilt. but again, the u.s. seems fairly certain. and in addition to their own -- the u.n. report, their own intelligence suggests very strongly that this was an action by government-controlled forces against the people. host: talk about how this report is being viewed around the world. it's written in on twit thart u.n. report is more political than factual and it's trying to keep russia and china happy. your take? guest: anything that stops short of assigning blame explicitly in a report certainly would be greeted with more favor by the russians and chinese and in fact the russians have done exactly what we expected which is to -- although there's no evidence in the report to suggest this, gone ahead and said that the report somehow proves that the rebels launched this attack. so, i think the politics of the security council are never far removed from the question of the u.n. and its effectiveness.

and russia and china willed the veto very effectively as positioning to give them a seat in the table in world affairs. and they have been very explicit throughout the two years of this syrian crisis in refusing to allow the security council to take any action up until now. it's fair to say that anything that comes out of the u.n. security council is aimed at gathering the votes of russia and china or at least stopping them from explicitly wielding their veto. host: let's go to cliff ard now from massachusetts on our independent line. you're on with susan glasser of "politico" magazine. caller: hi, susan. i have a concern here, with all the chest-beating that we have done. i think the u.s. is in a very poor position of losing a lot of credibility. the russians and the chinese and the syrians are masters at elay tactics and being able to

throw off all these other comments. i'm all for a political solution, but with the delay tactics that are even being employed now, we could be a year away and still talking about this same issue. what are we going to do to expedite this? what consequences is syria going to have if they don't move on this? or if the russians continue to advocate for the syrians anden this to delay this? -- and continue to delay this? guest: i think the caller has pointed out what one of the main foreign policy challenges is for president obama here which is this question of credibility. now he's invested his credibility in making this agreement with the russians. so on the one hand he has to follow through. he has to give the settlement a chance to work otherwise he risks undermining his credibility and now he's made a handshake deal here with the russians so he can't immediately reneg on it.

at the same time, credibility was one of the main reasons that obama cited for his initial willingness to launch a military strike in retaliation for this chemical weapons attack. because he had very memorabley just a year ago in august announced that he was imposing in effect a red line on the use of chemical weapons in the syrian conflict. he was warning assad a year ago that if you used chemical weapons there would be serious consequences and so in fact it was his credibility that was cited as the reason that he needed to go forward with the threat of mailtary strike. that was certainly the argument he heard behind closed doors from partners in the region like saudi arabia and qatar who have been strongly supporting the rebels in the syrian fight and they have very strongly made the case that if obama did not launch some sort of military attack or at least a credible threat of military action that he risked undermining u.s. credibility. so right now it seems like the

u.s. credibility potentially is at stake, which ever course president obama pursues. host: you brought up russia several times now. what have we learned about the dynamics of the u.s.-russia relationship within the u.n. as a result of what's happened so far in syria? guest: that certainly has been one of the most fascinating subplots of this story and as someone who lived in moscow for four years as a "the washington post" correspondent there, i've been fascinated to see this turn of events. over the last two years the u.s. has tried and failed, tried and failed to engage the russians in a real conversation over a diplomatic track to ending the syrian conflict and so it's particularly striking that we should have this dramatic 11th-hour deal here and i think what it suggests is , as has long been the case, even at a time of real tension between the united states and

russia, and remember this is a time of real tension. president obama canceled his meeting with putin weeks ago. he refused to show up. why? because president putin had decided to harbor the n.s.a. fugitive. there was a sense that the russians had nothing on the could come out of a summit meeting with the united states. there's a real freezing in relations between the u.s. and russia. so it makes it all the more dramatic. but again, you have a convergence of interests here that may not be aligned for very long, but temporarily were of course it's not like the russians decidely to become humanitarians and were so personally outraged by the chemical attack. but much more the case that they saw both an opportunity i think to outflank and outmaneuver the americans diplomatically, and at the same time they saw that their partnership with syria could possibly be advanced. remember, you no longer hear president obama and his

advisors talking about the ouster of assad, which for the last two years was stated policy. president obama in the past had repeatedly called for assad to go. now, he's no longer talking about that. so it's possible that the russians believe they've just ensured the longer term survival of the assad regime by basically convincing him to give up his chemical weapons in order to stay in power. host: a figure americans are hearing a lot about, you had a profile of him for foreign policy earlier this year calling him minister no. what do americans need to know about him? guest: first of all, any many ways is the architect of this russian diplomat initiative that we're seeing. and it's sort of a challenge that he was really made that he spent his whole career building up to. he spent two decades at the

before returning to russia to become its foreign minister. he's now russia's longest serving foreign minister since the end of the cold war. e's a real classic diplomat, former secretary of state rice told me that he often reminded her of a classic diplomat in the mold of a 19th century diplomat. the kind of guy who feels like he can sit down at the table with you and negotiate man-to-man and get things done. he's a real character. he sees russia as his religion and returning russia to great power status is really much his mission after what he sees as the indignities of the early 1990's when the soviet union broke up and there was the sense that russia's power and status in the world had really plummeted. host: we're talking with susan glasser who the editor of "politico" magazine. the former editor in chief of foreign policy from 2010 to

2013. also a "washington post" co-chief of "the washington post" moscow bureau. back to the phones. jordan is waiting from washington, d.c. on our democratic line. good morning. caller: good morning. i was wondering if your guest could ive give us a brief summation on the nuclear proliferation treaty, how many nations currently have that capability, as well as the geneva convention with respect to chemical weapons treaty, how many nations have that capability? and with respect to assad, the evidence now is overwhelming. we shouldn't be slapping him on the wrist and taking away his nuclear weaponry toy as though he were a child. this man is a war criminal. he needs to be prosecuted and anybody that's missed those crimes as well, that should be their fate.

thank you. guest: first, just a quick clarification. we're talking not about nuclear capacity on the part of the syrian government. but it's chemical weapons arsenal. i think one of the problems with these treaties that the caller mentioned, the chemical weapons convention, that the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, is had the countries that are the rowing actors, the ones -- rogue actors are not the parties to these treaties and that is the case with syria, for example. which has been acquiring this chemical weapons arsenal since the time of assad's father and saw this as a key part of its strategic arsenal over time. it's only now, just two weeks ago assad was denying that he had these chemical weapons and his country was not a party to the chemical weapons convention. so part of what's happened is he has agreed to join the convention as part of his agreement to give up the weapons. host: let's go to mel now from baltimore, maryland, on our democratic line. you're on with susan glasser.

caller: i was like to talk about the situation with syria and the united states. i just think really it's about a regime change. i think people better start waking up and really understanding who the real terrorists are. because we're not good as though we're terrorists. we act as terrorists. if the president can go to war without congress' approval, that's considered a dictatorship. basically. and they're violating our own constitutional rights as well as laws. every time that we have war, it's about money and power for the most part. the u.s., the u.n., they know what's going on. just like, for example, with the world trade center. when the world trade center went down, where was the u.n. to investigate that when they found explosive materials around the world trade center? where were they at? you never heard about that. host: we'll get the conspiracy

theories and go on to rowland from miami beach, florida, on our independent line. rowland, good morning. caller: good morning. just wanted to state that a a begins to be seen as narcostate not so long ago. and i believe that it still is producing haren -- her win in lebanon and -- heroine in lebanon and southern syria as well. the brother in line to become the prime minister after hapa assad's death was killed in one he ese disputes because basically ran the openum production -- opium production. host: are you saying this is

something the u.s. needs to look at? caller: i think this is something that the u.s. is aware of, it's been discussed in the past in academic forums as well. but beyond that, the syrians lebanon up y in until around 2009. that is to say, they were able to make decisions in lebanon for the lebanese government that were security decisions and they did it by counterbalancing their proxy, hezbollah. which is the party that is basically maintaining the narcotics trade in south lebanon and exporting throughout europe and throughout the world. host: i'll give you a chance to jump in. is that an issue that you've

studied? guest: i think in its broader sense, the caller is raising the framing of the regional implications of this conflict. which are many. and he pointed out about lebanon and it varies the risk of destabilizing lebanon which has only had a fragile recovery from its own decades of civil war. more broadly there is the issue of proxies who are taking part in the fight, the civil war that's happening inside syria right now. so you have not only hezbollah, but also the potential for ther iranian bask groups and militia -- ba'ath groups and militia. there was a controversial video that came out earlier this week that reported to show iranians fighting on the side of the government. and you have militias backed by various parties. you have the saudis and the qataris who are backing particular rebel factions.

there's a concern that the al qaeda affiliated group has become the strongest and most military effective of the rebel groups. then you have obviously groups who are more western or yentsed, that -- governments like the united states would prefer to see emerge with the upper hand. so you really have this competing interest of the whole middle east clashing inside syria right now in way that is potentially very destabilizing. host: we noted that the united nations is opening its 68th session today. talk about the effectiveness of the u.n., specifically the security council as it's viewed in the world right now. guest: i think unfortunately the syria problem suggests the limits of the u.n. system and if we're going to have an international group like the united nations this would seem to be the classic challenge

that the world should come together and do something about . on a humanitarian basis alone, you have two million refugees created in syria as a result of this ongoing civil war. you have over 1,000 people killed in this horrific chemical weapons attack. and yet i think the world most people would associate with the united nations unfortunately is -- [inaudible] there would be literal gridlock in new york city next week as all the world leaders descend upon the city for the annual meeting and their limousines and motorcades compete with one another, but then there's also unfortunately the policy gridlock that we associate with the security council system in which the permanent five-council members, the united nations, russia, china, has a veto and are able in effect to stop any action to which they object. and over the years what that has meant is that the most

politically sensitive disputes, whether in the balkans in the 1990's or here -- [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2013] >> washington journal airs live every morning, 7:00 a.m. eastern here on c-span. we're going live now to the u.s. house. accompany house resolution 347, resolution providing for consideration of the bill h.r. 761 to require the secretary of the interior and the secretary of agriculture to more efficiently develop domestic resources of the mineral and mineral materials of strategic and critical importance to economic and economic security and economic competitiveness. the speaker pro tempore: referred to the house calendar and ordered printed. proceedings will resume on the motions to suspend the rules. votes will be taken in the following order. h.r. 3092. yeas 449, s. 793 by the

and nays. the first electronic vote will be conducted as a 15-minute vote, remaining votes will be five minutes. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion from the the gentleman from kentucky, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 3092 as amended. the clerk: h.r. 3092, a bill to amend the missing children's assistance act and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. 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 expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 407, the nays are two. 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 on the table. the unfinished business is the vote on the motion of the gentleman from california, mr.

roadways, to suspend the rules and pass h.r. 2449 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: union calendar number 153, h.r. 2449, a bill to authorize the president to extend the term of the agreement for cooperation between the government of the united states of america anlt government of the republic of korea concerning civil uses of nuclear energy for a period not to exceed march 19, 2016. the speaker pro tempore: the question is will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be 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: the yeas are 407, the nays zero, 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid n the table. the speaker: the house will be n order. members will please take their seats.

members will please take their seats. for what purpose does the gentlelady from the district of columbia rise? ms. norton: i ask unanimous consent to speak out of order. the speaker: without objection, so ordered. ms. norton: i thank for entatives murphy joining me as i rise in tribute to 12 americans almost all federal employees, who lost their lives in the service of the united states yesterday in a mass shooting at the navy yard. they were civilian employees naval sea or the

systems command. unlike the blew collar workers of the old navy yard, naval sea systems command employees are skilled white collar workers, highly trained to offer technical support for building, buying and manufacturing the navy's ships and combat systems. the navy yard was renovated with historic deference to the old manufacturing workplace and the aval sea systems command jump-started the development of the neighborhood that received them. the naval sea systems command became a good neighbor, though we knew little of the work done in that secure facility. we did know this.

these federal employees deserved our respect and our admiration because they and their work were vital to our nation. us for he house to join a moment of silence for these 12 who gave all they had for their country. michael arnold, martin, arthur, marryeah, kathleen, john, and s, kenneth, gerald richard. the speaker: the house will observe a moment of silence.

the speaker: five-minute voting will continue. the vote is on the motion of the the gentleman from from california, mr. royce, to uspend the rules and pass s. 793 on which the yeas and nays are ordered. the clerk will report the title of the bill. the clerk: an act to support revitization and reform of american states and for other purposes. the speaker: will the house suspend the rules and pass the bill as amended. 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 383, the nays are 24. zero recorded as present. 2/3 being in the affirmative, the rules are suspended, the bill is passed and without objection the motion to reconsider is laid on the table.

the house will be in order. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. he house will be in order. please take your conversations off the floor, the house will be in order. take your conversations off the floor. members please take your conversations off the floor.

>> mr. speaker, i rise today to thank the many first national guard, volunteers and local leaders who have worked tirelessly beginning the middle of last week to respond to floods in colorado. mr. gardner: an area the size of connecticut has been impacted by over 0 inches of rain in certain areas of the state. 19,000 homes have been damaged or destroyed. countless people have had their lives changed forever. but as is the case with all tragedies in colorado and across this great country, we come together as a community, as neighbors, to help one another in times such as these. and we know in the months and years to come, there will be great challenges. there will be trying times.

as we try to find answers for those families who lost so much. and so, mr. speaker, the house, as we recognize those efforts, efforts such as helpcoloradonow.org that are doing so much, to do so much good for the people there. this has happened before, great tragedy, when we come together, we will rise up and be stronger because we are colorado. yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from illinois seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for ne minute. >> mr. speaker, several weeks

ago we had a debate about the debates proposed by the majority. ms. duckworth: their proposal was too high. they've doubled that to $40 billion, nine times what was passed in a bipartisan bill in the senate. they've abandoned all attempts at bipartisanship and compromise to satisfy the demands of the far right. we should not be playing politics with a program that means so much to american families. the $40 billion in cuts will slash benefits to as many as six million americans including 1070,000 veterans. the average benefit or snap is just $4.50 a day, $1.50 a meal. as someone who benefited from food stamps as a teenager, i know what the safety net means. it's the difference between a child going to be hungry or having the energy to focus in school. it allows seniors to eat and afford medication. in my district the poverty rate

rose from 5.8% in 2000 to 9.8% in 2011. we need to find ways to cut poverty in our community, not cutting programs like snap that work. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, it seems the -- mr. poe: mr. speaker, it seems the administration has finally made up etc. mind and will arm the syrian rebels. never mind that syria is in the midst of a messy civil war, that involvement is not in the national security interest of the united states. the other rebel groups include foreign mercenaries, criminal, and in my opinion half are al qaeda operatives, including al qaeda from iraq and al-nusra, an al qaeda terrorist group. last i heard, the yeats was at war with al qaeda. there's no way our government

can prevent the guns sent to syria from getting into the hnds of al qaeda rebels. the administration constantly and conveniently goes out of its ways to keep americans from possessing firearm bus seems to be substance abuse clasty -- substance abuse yastcally delighting in running guns to other countries, drug cartels in mexico, rebel groups in libya and terrorists in syria. odd gun policy, don't you think, mr. speaker? i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, today the safe climate caucus held a remarkable forum. mr. waxman: it was the first time in congress individuals were invited to talk about the personal hardships they have experienced as a result of climate change. we heard from witnesses from around the country, matt russell, an iowa farmer, told

us how his crops had been flooded by record rains. hugh fitzsimmons, a texas rancher, described how his herd was decimated by a record drought. emily from california explained how the massive california rim fire is devastating her community. stephanie of new york -- a new york homeowner talked about the devastation she suffered when superstorm sandy struck long island, new york, and reverend tyrone edwards of louisiana spoke movingly of the damage inflicted on his community by enormous hurricanes. for these americans, climate change is already painfully real. they told us climate change is , it's stant threat already affecting families across the country. the witnesses asked that congress stop denying the

science. they want action and i think it's about time we start to listen. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. thompson: mr. speaker, when unlicensed and uncredited providers are allowed to provide prosthetic and aesthetic services through medicare, the public and taxpayers are short changed. the market is prone to fraud and abuse where substandard products and services are being furnished to medicare beneficiaries and other patients. despite congressional mandates not enough has been done to ensure that legitimate providing rs are these materials. i introduced a commonsense

piece of legislation to identify medicare ben fish yays by holding government accountable by reducing fraud in medicare. i encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join us in this bipartisan effort by co-sponsoring h.r. 3112, the medicare ornotics improvement act of 2013. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for ne minute. ms. jackson lee: i heard pow, pow, pow, then for a few seconds it stopped, and then pow, pow, pow. i just started running. the sentiments of this newspaper fell upon me and many other americans, the word

"again." another mass shooting in the united states of america. now at the naval sea system command at the naval command in d.c. coming from texas reminded me of the horrific tragedy and terrorist act of fort hood. if you could not call this terrorism you could call it a domestic rampage but what you could call sit a failing of what we in the yeats congress have not done, to pass universal background checks and to focus on the mental health needs of those who are disturbed and might cause the havoc and loss of life for so many that families today mourn. the question becomes, as we stand here today, how much longer will it take us to pass sensible gun legislation to stop this violence? i pray for those who lost their life, mr. speaker, and i ask this congress to act and pass

universal background checks and the stopping of these idiculous top secret outsourcing. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for onemen. >> this is national child cancer awareness month. childhood cancers are the leading cause of death by disease among children in our country. each year, 14,400 children are diagnosed with cancer. i've been privileged to meet many doctors and nurses who search for answers at the mayo clinic, the children's hospital of hospital and the university of minnesota. there's no doubt we can be proud of the work they're doning in minnesota. i'm sponsoring legislation, co-sponsoring legislation that will make cancer treatments more affordable for families and encourage the development

of new treatments by redirecting taxpayer funds spent on presidential campaign into childhood cancer research. mr. paulsen: we all look forward to the day when cancer is 100% treatable in all our children. that's why i stand alongside doctors and families and most importantly cancer patients as we look for a cure. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from kansas seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one inute. >> mr. speaker, freedom of speech and religion and the recognition of god-given dignity of every human life are core principles on which america was founded but these inherent freedoms are being attacked. the southern poverty law centers is one of the worst

offenders. this group routinely attacks mainstream pro-family organizations slandering them with accusations of hatred and bigotry. mr. huelskamp: motivated by their inflammatory rhetoric, a into an office and shot a security guard. he admitted it was because of the southern poverty law center's list. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> on this constitution day, i want to applaud those in the armed forces who take a pledge to honor and defend the constitution at the risk of

life and limb. every generation of americans has been protected by what frederick douglass once called "that glorious liberty document." we should take the time today to absolute those who defend the constitution. mr. bent voleyow: i fear -- mr. bent voleyow: i fear sometimes we take for granted the sacrifices these brave men and women bear. they are the ones that allow us to gather here today to do the will of the people. they are the reason why the constitution has lasted over two centuries as the prime example in the world of a free government. thank you and i yield back my time. the speaker pro tempore: are there further the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from california, mr.

garamendi, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. garamendi: mr. speaker, earlier in the session today, we paused in remembrance of those who were killed here in washington, d.c. yesterday. yet another tragedy for this nation, another shooting, raged by some individual. we heard on the floor here a few minutes ago, a plea by some of our colleagues to call us to action so that we who represent the millions upon millions of americans would find within

ourselves the courage to take ction on wise gun safety legislation, menltal health and other things that -- mental health and other things we know that can address the problems that plague this nation. today, as we start this one hour, i just want to remind ourselves that we have work to do here. joining me tonight is paul tonko, representative from the state of new york. we often have had the opportunity to speak on the floor about the issues that confront us. and perhaps, paul, you may want to comment on this tragedy and then turn to the other issues we want to take up today. mr. tonko: thank you, representative garamendi on how to invest in america and create the climate that best cultivates job action and job growth in our

society. just moments ago on the house floor, we held a moment of silence in recognition, in commemoration and respect for those who gave it their all as federal employees, many federal employees in that situation, and i just want to attach my comments to those of yours in steppeding my condolences to the family members and friends who are so impacted by this tragedy, this horrific act that wipes out their lives prematurely and may they rest in peace. mr. garamendi: i join you in those condolences. our subject matter was going to be about the economy, about income within this nation or lack of it. i just want to start about eferring to a statement that

f.d.r., franklin roosevelt, made during the economic crisis of the 1930's. and the statement is etched in the marble at the f.d.r. memorial here in washington, d.c. and he said the test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. the test of our progress. what has been our progress over this last several years? this last week, the economic study of the progress of america ince the great crash of 2007 was made public. and there has been progress. there has been economic growth. there has been the creation of wealth. and we have seen progress. but not the kind of progress

about in the lked 1930's. what we have seen is exactly the opposite of what he has or what he called for, to provide more for those who have little. here it is. the tale of two americans. a stunted recovery and nonetheless, the recovery. so where did the economic growth go? where did the wealth go that was created? was it to those who have little? no. no. no. 95% of all of the wealth that this economy created since 2007 and the great crash went to the op 1%. 95% of all of the wealth went to

the top 1%. he remaining 99% wound up with . of the wealth the nation's biggest economy created since the crash of 2007. franklin roosevelt would not have stood for, and he didn't. nor did bill clinton. from 1993 to 2000, the economy grew very, very rapidly. the distribution of the wealth that was created during those years went in a remarkably different way than what has happened over the last five years. during the clinton period, 55% of all the wealth that this nation created went to the 99%, the bottom 99%. the top 1% did very well.

they got 45% of all of the wealth. you can say that was not enough for the bottom 99%. and i would agree, but compared to what's happened over these last five years, it's remarkable improvement in the distribution of wealth. so, what is the distribution of wealth? it's not a class struggle. it's about the men and women of this nation that work hard, that get up every day, go to their jobs, as did those 12 people who were killed yesterday here in the navy yard in washington, d.c. they worked hard for themselves, their families and for this nation. so men and women all across this nation doing what we want them to do, participating in this society. following the american dream, work hard, play by the rules,

get on the economic ladder and climb. here's what happened to them, not much. something is desperately wrong here in america that the result of five years of labor by the 99%, they would find their of the wealth that was created. this.d to address and tonight, our subject matter is how we can do that. but before we go to that, i want to put up one more chart and ask my colleague to join in. it does it mean, what does really mean down home? what does it mean out there in the subdivision on the t

enements. what does it mean in america when 95% of all of the wealth created winds up in the hands of 1%? here's what it means. it means that there is hunger in america. it means that mothers and fathers are not able to have a job that they can provide their hildren with a meal, with food on the table. it means that in this house of representatives, there will be this day, this week, an effort to provide even more hunger in america, more hunger, more children going without food, as the supplemental food program is lashed by $40 billion. $4 billion a year, 10 years, $40 billion, so the 1% can have even

more. this is not right. this is not right that in this nation, we have hunger. it is not america as it should be. and it's certainly, it certainly is not what franklin roosevelt said america should be when the test of our progress is not whether we add more abundance to those who have much, it is whether which provide enough for those who have too little. we have a challenge here in america. we need to change things. we need to change the public policies that would deny food to hungry children, to parents, to our seniors, to our children in schools. it's time for us to put in place policies that create real economic growth, real growth that the working men and women

in the nation can share economic progress of our nation. and tonight, we are going to spend some time talking about how we can do that. my friend from new york, paul tonko. mr. tonko: representative garamendi, you have highlighted the difference in the thought process and the philosophy of what was then under president franklin roosevelt and what is now. and certainly what has happened during the clinton years, which proved much more progressive in its nature. you know when we think of that quote of president roosevelt where society is tested as to whether or not they were going to add to the abundance of those who have much, that was a tremendous test, a challe this country to search deep into its moral compass and what you are highlighting here is it's an

ebb and flow, looking to pay for ways for tax breaks for those perched on the top and where you talk about that 95%, 98% growth going to the top 1%, that is unsustainable. when you think of the gimmicks that is going on to provide for the costs of such spending, these tax breaks for those perched on the top, tass done on cuts to programs that help the hungry, cuts that will impact seniors, cuts that will impact our very young, cuts that will impact our struggling families. now, there is no mistake the correlation between those tough times and those dependent on a number of federal programs. throughout history, you can suggest through data that are compiled that those charts go upward when you have tough

times, the reliance on some of these programs grow. and not unusual it happens through the recession. you have the elderly population that have nutrition inserted as part of their health care formula. it is part of their wellness agenda. if the diabetic doesn't get the knew trishal needs now, there are problems. if people are doing without food, it can be the difference between quality of life and sometimes survival because of the needs to have a well balanced nutritional program. we cannot asked our young children to go without the nutritional values or require them to study in a classroom on an empty belly. the moral compass is very direct here. it points our way and challenges us to take those words uttered

decades ago by president roosevelt and speak with more pro founress ownance than they were first uttered. we need to take that to mind. we need to look at what happened when we invested in america, in her working families in the toughest of times. when we think of the progress made, there is a gentleman who was challenged in his own right and led this nation, lifted this nation's economy while serving in a wheelchair, that is a powerful statement, one that had progressive outcomes written all over it. and we need to go forward, to grow the economy, a tax policy that draws fundamental fairness and not a gross disparity. -- as late as

the mid to late 1970's to today, you can chart what has happened with some of these efforts to reduce assistance to working families. and it is unsustainable. we cannot grow an economy with these sorts of policies in play. tonight, let's look at those investments from education, to higher education to infrastructure, to advanced manufacturing that is required to allow us to compete successfully in a global economy where our manufacturing base can survive if we do it smarter, not necessarily cheaper, do it smarter, we will land contracts, grow jobs with the productivity factor that is developed by inserting our policies into the transformation into advanced manufacturing economy and by providing the investments that will draw policies that are progressive and more resources that will provide a lucrative dividend and make an jefment rather than outright spending

that we saw with the tax relief measures that did not produce a growing economy. so, i think the challenge is before so i think the path forward, none of this kicking the can down the road, let's name the designees to the conference table from each house, each party. the president outlined his budget, the senate has passed its version of a budget, the house passed its version of a budget, let's name the participants at the conference table, let's flood the lights on the process, show the sharp contrast between various solutions and recommended approaches to allow the public to be best enfweaged in the process and understand the wisdom or lack thereof of some of the moves that are required or requested of us here in the house. mr. garamendi: mr. tonko, thank

you very much, you're quite correct, we need to move in that direction. the american economy is 60% or 70% based on consumer purchases of homes, cars and all those other goods. part of that reason that we're not seing the kind of economic growth that would normally occur in the recovery is the 99% don't have money. they lost a great deal of their wealth, trillions of dollars of their wealth was wiped out in the financial collapse. their pensions, their homes, the equity in their homes and as the economy has recovered, the creation of the road to wealth didn't go to -- of the growth to wealth didn't go to them. they're not able to increase their purchasing power. you are things we can do, were beginning that process, let's take our way through them. i'm going to put this back up. this is not just a picture of the distribution of wealth in the economy that is the economic growth, it's also a picture of why the economy

hasn't really returned. there are other factors to be sure. clearly the absence of purchasing power that is new wealth in the hands of the 99%, the absence of that has retarded the economic recovery. this is something we talked about here many, many times and mr. tonko brought this up many issues, we call it the make it in america agenda. his follows along on president obama's jobs program, many of these elements are the same as he proposed. they're displayed a little differently here. tax policy, critically important. we need to redo our tax policy, mr. tonko talked about the tax policy and the effect that we've seen over these many years, but what i'd like to do today is focus on these other issues, the issue of infrastructure, research, education, labor and energy.

on the labor side, we've talked about that in great detail here. the working men and women, laboring as they are, are they getting a fair share of the economic growth? the answer is categorically no. are there policies that can change that? yes. one of them has been on discussion here in congress, the minimum wage issue. california has a minimum wage law that's before the governor. he's expected to sign it. that will push the minimum wage up and -- to about, i think, $10 an hour. wage ill cause the entire structure in california to move upward, shifting wealth to the working men and women in california. whether the nation will follow that, the president has called for an increase in the minimum wage and that will certainly be helpful in shifting to the working population of this nation a larger share or at least a fair share of the growth of the economy.

let's talk about infrastructure for a while. i know this is an issue you were working on, mr. tonko, following the floods a year ago. we see those same floods, different floods, devastating floods occurring in colorado. you were one of the strong advocates for rebuilding our infrastructure. why don't you pick that issue up and talk about how we might be able to accomplish it. mr. tonko: it's policy or lack thereof that's impacting us heavily. witnessing some of the unusual 100-year storms, 500-year stores as they're designated in a rapid succession over the last several years, dating back to the late 1980's, but then in rapid succession, in 2007, 2008, 202, in an area just south of me that borders my district tells me the nomenclature is ludicrous.

it's happening much more frequently. it's because we don't embrace the information out there that the data is begging our attention. if we are going to continue to ignore the impact of mother nature, ignore global warming and impacts of mother nature on our infrastructure, we're going to have more and more bills for cleanup. if it just -- is it just replacement or are we talking about re-evaluating the situation? some of the electric utility efforts that stayed most strong were distributed energy projects along the coast with superstorm sandy. i saw infrastructure, bridges, displaced by the powerful force of water in some places equated to the cubic feet flow of niagara falls. data is telling you the storms are more and more frequent,

you'll get this extra volume of water, precipitation, do you just replace or take a longer span? a greater height to that bredge deseen? these are things that need to be discussed. it's going to be money coming out of the pocket that's reared because we're not dealing with the fundamental science that's telling us we should anticipate more and more of these storms. the infrastructure along these effort the coastal erosion is requiring all sorts of improvements to ports. this affects our economy. this requires a master plan. this requires a make it in america agenda that puts into play investment into our infrastructure to replace what has been damaged with a sound investment, re-investment here that improves upon a situation rather than just replaces when we know it will probably not withstand the forces of mother nature in the future. the infrastructure is critical and the millions we can put to

work, representative garamendi work that legislation. the president called for improvements in our infrastructure that will put millions to work. the best way to resolve a deficit is to have people go to work. and the dignity that comes -- comes with that investment in work opportunity is good for working class families across this country. we know what to do, let's get on with it. mr. gare men tee: you and and i were talking about this before we came up, you may want to take up this issue. this is an issue of what an infrastructure investment means to growing the economy. mr. tonko: and it speaks also to the order of investment, rather than the order of spending that some might label it. as we improve on our infrastructure, for every $1 invested, according to mark sandy, former economic advisor to senator john mccain, $1.57 is realized for every $1

invested. that's an opportunity to grow the economy by investing dollars with the anticipation that there will be a good return on that investment. that's how it works. that's the beauty of building. enge it's what president roosevelt saw in the 1930's and 1940's. he saw this opportunity to respond to the needs of america, public works projects that were absolutely essential. building water treatment centers. building schools and infrastructure. roads and the like. president eisenhower saw the beauty of an interstate highway system, putting people to work, making opportunities available for commerce. these are the fundamental needs of a sophisticated society. it's the needs of certainly america in a modern age, innovation economy. the roads and bridges, traditional sources, water treatment facility, utility grid upgrades, telecommunication, this goes well into new technology

spheres of today where you wire communities and neighborhoods for business. there's a dire need for that activity. that puts people to work. that's an investment that will draw a rate of return on the dollars invested in those projects. that's what makes the wisdom of hat approach very remarkably sound and comprehensible. i think that certainly history has taught us well. for us to ignore history at a moment when we're still struggling with this comeback, yes it's been a steady growth of private sector jobs but let's face it, many propositions sent to the house, and to the united states senate by the chief executive, by the president, have been denied simply by means of source from whom they're coming. let's be frank about this. and this is not the time to play personality warfare. it's the time to do sound, progressive policies that provide for then good poll

techs, bipartisan politics for this nation and her people. and her working families. it's as simple as that. let's go forward, invest in our manufacturing base, innovation economy, clean energy economy, which require the tools of modern day economy so that we can build it cheaper and smarter, perhaps, but definitely cheaper and that's how you land those contracts in the international marketplace. i am hopeful that our best days, representative garamendi, lie ahead. if we have the tenacity if we have the integrity to go forward with what are the soundest of policies and boldest of investments that are done, that are placed on the table with the full anticipation and expectation that there is a reasonable rate of rush on that investment. mr. garamendi: we know there's an immediate return on the investment in infrastructure. mark sandy laid it out there, you invest $1 in infrastructure now and get back $1.57.

and you get somebody working immediately, they become a taxpayer rather than a tax receiver. there's some real opportunities here. i want to take a couple of seconds, i was reading the "wall street journal" as i was flying from california today and there was an article by ronald ldstein, reagan's economic advisor, and he focused on several things, growing the economy, how do you get the economy growing? and he specifically talked about infrastructure. he talked about infrastructure as a way to immediately employee people, we certainly agree with that, and it's also a way you lay the foundation for future economic growth because that infrastructure is then available for the future. i was in fresno, california, i guess two or three years ago, went down to the high school to talk at an educational conference there and they were setting this conference in an

auditorium that was built by the w.p.a., the works progress administration, in the roosevelt period. the franklin delano roosevelt period. here was this wonderful auditorium laid out there, we ere using it 80 years later. 70 years later. and you go, wow, there's an infrastructure investment in education. and so it is by building this infrastructure, we employee people immediately and we then have the found eags for future economic growth. you mention water system, sanitation, electrical energy systems. roads, highways and the like. and it's jobs today. i want to talk about how we can finance -- mr. tonko: and our ports, our rail. mr. garamendi: this is not new economics. george washington in his first month in office, this is the first president, folks, his first month in august, turned

to -- in office, turned to alexander hamilton, his treasury secretary and said, develop an economic policy. hamilton came back, not with a report we would have of 7,000 pabling bus 50 or 60 pages and laid out an economic policy, number one on his agenda was to build america's infrastructure. ports, canals, i know you're going to launch into the erie canal since i mention canals, that's your favorite subject. but he talked about roads, laying down the infrastructure for the growth of the economy. before we get to your erie canal, i want to talk about something that actually happened. this is a good thing. this is a very good thing. in the stimulus bill, which by the way did work, not as robust as we would have liked, but it did work. there was a provision to build locomotives for amtrak, i think about $800 million over a period of years would be spent

on building locomotives for the east coast so you can get home, mr. tonko, on the east coast here, these locomotives were to be 100% american made. i don't know who wrote that provision but it was one of the very few provisions in the stimulus bill that said make it in america. 100% american made. seimens said $800 million. you have to make it in america. ok. seimens had a plant in sacramento. they got this contract. this is the first loco motive de in america made under seimens.

going to make 80 of these. 100% american-made and across the united states as a result of this infrastructure investment, we are beginning to see companies in a supply chain, some that are making the wheels, with the truck underneath, which is where the wheels attach to the locomotive. facility that attaches. 100% american-made. and by the way i have a piece of legislation in that would continue that that says if you are going to spend your tax oney on highways, bridges, locomotives, your tax money will be used to buy american-made equipment, just like george georges said we ought to do it. mr. tonko: history instructs us, if we allow it, will guide us in some of our toughest times. we realize some of our greatest,

most monumental success stories. you mentioned the canal, which for my area, the 20th congressional district is a done canal. of that people look back, what a wonderful project. it met with great controversy and it was proposed because of economic difficult times and here was a vision. give us the vision of how you can grow the economy, what can we do that is strong and forceful and will change the outcomes out there and it was port, nection of a little town called new york that gave birth to mill towns that were epicenters of innovation. a struggle to find the investment available to build this canal. the struggle will always be there.

mr. garamendi: what was that canal? mr. tonko: erie canal. there will be always be a struggle. there will be a counterforce for every force that is perceived as good. we shouldn't walk away because the environment is difficult. we go forward and know what has to be done. history has been instructing us here. science through data compilation s reminding us of some out comes -- superstorm sandy which gripped the entire northeast was atypical. hurricanes were unheard of that produced all sorts of damage including loss of life, loss of farm life, businesses and homes, in some ways, swept away by the forces of water. that is a difficult situation that needs to be addressed with

infrastructure improvements. if we do not take this to heart and mind, we will be a lesser society for not having paid strict attention to both science and history, which ought to guide us. mr. garamendi: if you look at superstorm sandy, i don't know what they are going to call the storm that is occurring in colorado, but we are seeing the necessity to prepare for climate change and these new, very strong, very dangerous storms that we now have seen repeated. there is going to be a major xrarbg -- infrastructure investment following the east coast rebuilding after superstorm sandy. as that investment is made, we will see the economy pick up as men and women return to work and spend that money on

american-made concrete, as we rebuild these necessary infrastructure works. we will add to the economic potential of that rebuilding. now, how are we going to pay for it? let's get down to what i think has been the most common complaint here. oh, you are going to borrow the money and run up the deficit. if you make an investment in infrastructure, you are going to immediately employ people and you will be making a major step towards solving the deficit problem. you do that now. begin that investment now. yes, you are going to borrow the money, not all of it, and there are ways we can deal with that, but there is a necessity of enhancing the economy. a suggestion was the infrastructure as one of the principal ways of doing that. now, we have ways of financing this. it has been discussed forever,

dating back to the mid and early 1990's, that we ought to have an infrastructure bank. the europeans have an infrastructure bank. the munch goes out to build infrastructure. the repayment is made by bridge tolls, by fees on roads, by canal fees, other kinds of fees. that money comes back and circulated. the president has called for an infrastructure bank, taking an idea that has been before congress for the last 20 years and he said let's do it. let's do it. we can borrow money at the federal level sometimes at 3%, put that into an infrastructure bank and invite the private sector and then lend that money out to those projects that have a cash flow, toll bridges, sanitation projects, waterworks, so we can get the economy moving. we also had a program coming out of the stimulus bill called

build america bonds. those lasted two years and then r colleagues here refused to re-enact the build america bonds. there are other ways which entities can borrow the money and build the infrastructure and get their economy going. and furthermore, laying the foundation for future economic growth. you can't build a city on yesterday's infrastructure. you need to replace it to be sure and this is part of the problem in our cities, the aging infrastructure, the waterworks, the sanitation system and the rest. we need to rebuild that, but you need to expand the infrastructure. one final way that we can talk about financing this is how we do spend the tax revenue that does come in to the american treasury. right now, congress is debating on how to spend money for the

next fiscal year that begins on going to how are we spend it. part of that appropriation process is to appropriate $87 billion for the afghanistan war in the coming year, october 1 through the 2014 year until september 30. $87 billion for afghanistan. how much money for flood protection in colorado? flood protection in my district? flood protection across the eastern seaboard to build the seawalls, virtually nothing. but $87 billion for afghanistan. for what? for what? to build facilities that we will either destroy as we leave or will be destroyed shortly after we leave?

$7 billion for the afghan national army, $2.5 billion is for good things to be done, no line items, no particular knowledge on what they are going to spend that money on. up in some ill wind bank account by some crook in the bahrain banks. what could we do with $2.5 billion in america? and by the way, we are drawing down the troops in afghanistan. we are going to spend more money in afghanistan next year than we are this year, even though we have 60% less troops in afghanistan. we are making choices. your representatives, 435 of us and 100 members of the senate are making choices of how your money is going to be spent. by the way, i haven't talked about the nuclear bombs, 5,000

of them. we are going to rebuild them. now there is a good investment. really? i don't think so. district can't protect my citizens in my district to prevent floods. so we are making choices. we are making choices for you, the american taxpayers, about how your money is going to be spent. for me, i want to spend it in america. american-made goods and equipment, not on products from china, as happened with the newly reopened san francisco-oakland bay bridge. steel from china, not from america. i want that money spent here. and i want that money spent on our infrastructure, on our education, on research, energy projects. we are going to make choices.

we are making those choices right now. we are up against the wall. by the end of this month, september 30, the government runs out of money. where are we going to spend it or are we going to spend it at all or shut down government? i don't know. i'm worried about the choices that we're making and worried about more expenditure in afghanistan and not here at home. i'm worried about rebuilding all these nuclear weapons that god willing we'll never use. choices. can we actually build america? can we find the willingness to crite an infrastructure bank? can we find the willingness to come back home and spend it here and build this economy, because ultimately as our joint chiefs of staff have said, it's the

american economy, without that strength, there won't be military strength. i have gone on too far here. mr. tonko, let's begin to wrap this up. mr. tonko: i will offer my closing comments. what you talk about in closing choses, it's the priority we establish in a bipartisan fashion that unable us to go forward with the best blueprints that grows the most hope and promise for this nation. if we can develop that hope, we have done our job. this is about investing in the american dream. it's about responding to that old, old addage that you have that american dream here in this wonderful nation where people rightfully anticipate that if they play by the rules, roll up their sleeves and invest their talent and passions into work, they rightfully anticipate to taste success and that allows

them to have an equal shot at an equal opportunity in this nation. that has not been the guiding force. we have had an unlevel playing field and made choices that penalize the great percentage of americans, 95% to 98% of americans have been impacted. so it's important for us, i believe, to offer that dream, that american dream, the underpinnings of support that it rightfully requires. the cost of a college education ought to be addressed by washington. we need to forcefully come up with a plan that reduces that cost, because that higher ed opportunity, they are training the work force of tomorrow. without that work force and human infrastructure, we are less robust in our competitive force. what about the investment, as representative garamendi mentioned in infrastructure?

what about that infrastructure build that has worked well in sections of the globe? why not go forward so small business can prosper in that outcome? the great engine of this comeback has been small business growth, jobs provided by those business citizens who are connected to the community that have enabled men and women to draw a paycheck, to some sort of commitment that they may make as a small business person, giving that work opportunity to their neighbors and to the communities that they call home. that's the strength that we need for small business so we can continue to be that engine of comeback, comeback scenario is incredibly invaluable. and what about going forward with the commitment. there is a soundness of that moral compass. forever those that require justice in our society, economic and social justice.

we are reminded by our founding parents we are in search of a more perfect union. the imperfections have to be addressed by those priorities, established by us, the peoples' representatives by us in this house and the senate and in the white house. all of us working in a bicameral, bipartisan way to put aside petty differences and put aside personality warfare and make certain we go forward with an agenda that is american, united and lifted by the american dream. our days that lie ahead hold great promise and great hope. i'm convinced that our best days lie ahead if we allow history and science to instruct us and reach our hearts, souls and minds as we go forward with the development of a budget that will be sound and reflective of all of america with every one of

her daughters and sons reflected in those decisions. i thank you for bringing us together. mr. garamendi: franklin roosevelt laid it out clearly when he said, the test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have too little. 95% of the wealth that's been generated over the last phi years winds up with 1%, we've got a problem. because the economy isn't going o grow and what will happen is this. hunger in america. later this week we'll take up the nutrition bill for this nation. and there are those who want to remove $40 billion from the

nutrition programs for our children, for our seniors, for those who are unemployed, for those sedging for work. we can do better. we really can. the best days ray -- are ahead of us, if this congress and the senate together with the president work together andly out those plans that have informed us historically that they work. investment. investment in those things that make america strong. enfra structure. research. education. those are things that are timeless. and work year after year. they're also thing that was recently been reduced and cut. we can't let this happen in america. we cannot allow that to happen. mr. speaker, with that, i think

it's time to yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. under the speaker's announced policy of january 3, 2013, the gentleman from ohio, mr. johnson is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. johnson: i thank you, mr. speaker. it's an honor to be standing before the house this evening to talk about a very, very important issue, an issue that is important not only to my constituents in eastern and southeastern ohio but to americans across the nation. and the issue is, the survival of the coal industry. coal has provided america's energy engine for generations. and can for many future generations, we but have policies out of this

administration that reflect the value that the coal industry has meant to america and the future that it has in front of us. coal is an abundant, affordable, and reliable form of energy. coal directly or indirectly employees nearly 800,000 americans. and supplies approximately 40% of our nation's power generation. oal mining employees across my district number in the thousands. in eastern and southeastern ohio. also provides nearly 80% of ohio's electricity and it's the energy engine for ohio's manufacturing industry, which so many of my constituents

depend on for their livelihood. and i'm very proud to be joined tonight, mr. speaker, by some of my colleagues who are equally passionate about the coal industry and its value to america both in the past and in the future. and at this point i'd like to recognize my friend and colleague from the great state of kentucky, the sixth district, representative andy barr. mr. barr: i thank the gentleman, my friend from ohio, for yielding and for organizing this special order on coal. this fall marks the fifth anniversary of the financial crisis. we remain burdened by a weak economic recovery with unemployment still lingering above 7%. 2/3 of the american people living paycheck to paycheck, only 58% of the working age population in this country employed.

but this does not seem to concern this president or this administration. unable to wage a war in syria due to immense public opposition, the president for some reason seems intent on conducting a war on jobs. whether it's driving up the cost of health care with the disastrous affordable care act or burdening community banks with mountains of bureaucratic red tape from the dodd-frank act this administration is seemingly intent on doing everything in its power to ensure this recovery remains slow and painful. the finalization of the new source performance standards rules from the e.p.a. for greenhouse gas emissions this week will represent the latest and perhaps the most damaging barrage in this war on jobs. this regulatory carbon tax is the keystone of a radical

environmental agenda. the disastrous results of which are already known in my district of central and eastern kentucky. the consequences of these regulations have echoed throughout the hills of appalachia and they will reverberate across the country in years to come. the new source performance standards will finish the job that a deadlocked permitting process and million billion dollar regulations like the utility met have started. killing the coal industry and driving up the cost of energy, a top line budget item for families already struggling to get by in this president's economy. but no one should be purr prized. this is the one president the -- one promise the president has made and kept. when running in 2008, president obama, then candidate obama, cade his policies would make the cost of electricity skyrocket.

more recently, white house climate advisor daniel shragg admitted that this administration's previously only thinly veiled position, he said, famously now, quote, a war on coal is exactly what is needed, unquote. mr. speaker, i can't think of another example of a presidential administration pledging to put hardworking americans in a centuries old industry totally out of work. apparently for the crime of providing low cost energy that drives the engine of our economy. the damage of these policies are already clear in kentucky. just yesterday, another 525 coal miners employed at three eastern kentucky mines operated by the james river coal company were given pink slipped. my heart goes out to these

miners and their families. i have met some of these people. they are just trying to follow their ancestors by digging up a piece of the american dream in the appalachian foothills. last month the commonwealth of kentucky released statistics on the health of the coal industry for the second quart of this year and the story they tell is dire. even before yesterday's news of another 525 layoffs. eastern kentucky coal mines facing the brunt of this president's regulatory overreach, shed another 851 jobs last quarter, leaving the total number of kentuckians employed at the mines at just 12,342. that's the lowest number since kentucky began keeping such statistics in 1927. eastern kentucky coal production is down a whopping 41.4% in just the last two years. and with those reductions we

have lost over 5,700 mining jobs. and now the new source performance standards will prohibit coal from even competing in the energy marketplace even though the final regulations have now been delayed a year due to industry and public opposition as so often before this administration has brushed those concerns aside and proceeded apace. the e.p.a. even forecast given the regulatory environment that there will be no new coal plants built after this year. rather than phasing in rules to allow all types of fuel to adapt, these regulations on new and existing plants single out coal, stifling the promise of carbon capture in its crib, a technology that could have provided the united states with a revolutionary technology on the magnitude of hydraulic fracturing that could have driven exports and paid real benefits in ormes -- in terms

of carbon emission reductions. instead the yeats will endure unilateral economic disarmament while our international competitors continue to pursue growth oriented policy. other the next few years as these policies take hold, the rest of the country will be made aware of this disaster that is already taking place in appalachia. already, one fifth of the nation's coal-fired power plants, 204 plants across 25 states, closed between 2w50eu7b and 2012. the rest will shutter prematurely in the years following implementation of the new source performance standards. seven, e.p.a. regulations already proposed over the last our years are forecast to cost $16.8 -- $16.7 billion annually once implemented.

the new source performance standards will trump that figure, constituting the largest energy tax of all time, implemented by regulatory fiat without the consent of the people's elected representatives in congress. that's because this president's own party couldn't enact this radical environmental agenda through cap and trade in the first two years of this president's administration. the loss of 69,000 mega watts of coal-fired power will ripple through the economy, costing an estimated 887,000 jobs in the mining, utility, shipping and manufacturing sectors, per year. the president had pledged to spur growth in manufacturing and low energy costs at home, coupled with rising wages in countries like china and india, promised to restore our competitive advantage in manufacturing. but the new source performance

standards will put an end to those prospects. mr. speaker, united states has 250 years worth of coal reserves at current consumption rates that could, if utilized, provide affordable energy and high tech informing feedstocks. but the president isn't interested in playing this ace up america's sleeve. wants to stay the course on a disastrous energy rationing policy that has already put thousands in the unemployment lines in my neck of the woods in kentucky and all throughout central appalachia and will put hundreds of thousands of more hardworking americans there in the years to come. so i urge the president to abandon these disastrous job-killing policies and to come to congress work on a plan that will relieve energy kansases for our families.

put the american people back to work, and protect the environment. otherwise, this week's announcement of these new source performance standards will demonstrate a willful denial of these ambitions and a ruthless attack on a centuries old industry that's provided jobs and economic opportunity for thousands of americans. and i want to end my comments this evening by telling a story that illustrates the human cost and the human dimension of this administration's war on coal. in the eastern edge of my district sits a small town of campton, kentucky, in wolf county, kentucky. when i was home during the august recess i went there and had a town hall meeting to listen to the concerns of people who were struggling and i met a young woman by the name of sally. she came up to me after the town hall meeting with tears welling up in her eyes and she looked at me and she said my husband just lost his job in

the coal mines. he's a coal miner he lost his jobs because the environmental protection agency would not issue a coal mining permit to his employer. and as a result, they had to lay off all the coal miners, including my husband, is what this woman told me. she said, here's the problem. my children need to go back to school. it's august, it's time to go back to school and they're growing up and they don't have shoes. they've grown out of their shoes. so i don't know what to do because we can't afford shoes. so i went ahead and bought them flip-flops so that they wouldn't be embarrassed to go become to school. imagine that. politicians and bureaucrats in washington, d.c., putting this orking they can't even afford shoes for their children. i don't care if you are republican or a democrat, a supporter of this administration

r not, it is fundamentally wrong and fundamentally wrong for the federal government to put american families into economic distress. stand in opposition to this radical agenda that is destroying jobs, opportunities and the american dream and with that, i yield back. mr. johnson: i thank our colleague from yielding back. i think you can see, mr. speaker, the passion that's coming to washington to advocate on the part of the coal industry. we're not just talking about a black rock that's dug out of the ground. we're talking about lives. we're talking about american lives. we're talking about jobs and the

ability to put food on the table , to put clothes on our children, to provide a manufacturing base so that americans have somewhere to work. and to do what america knows how to do best, innovate, and compete, and solve problems. i'm proud now to turn over some time to another one of our colleagues, representative kramer from the great state of orth dakota. -- cramer from north dakota. mr. cramer: i love the opportunity to tell the story of north dakota. a lot of people think of north dakota as an oil-producing state somewhere out there in the wild west.

we are the second leader in producing oil. even long before north dakota was one of the top 10 producers of wind energy, long before that, north dakota was producing electricity by burning coal. in fact, for decades, north dakota's been generating electricity, burning coal. at the current burn rate, there is a 800-year supply under our prairies. and prior to being elected in this great institution, i was the public service commissioner and carried the portfolio of coal mining in our state. i oversee the permitting of the mines, the inspections of the mines, the releasing of the bond at the end of the life of the mine. north dakota companies mine over 30 million tons of coal generating about 5,000 megawatts

and we have thousands of acres of coal mining. it is important to north dakota the state of fewer than 700,000 citizens employs 28,000 of those 700,000 people and has an economic impact of $3 billion and generates over $100 million of tax revenue to help fund the priorities of our state. to provide some perspective, mr. speaker, on the wage impact, two counties, mercer and oliver counties are home to five coal mining companies and two counties with the highest wages of any county in our state and we have a state with very high wages. but those direct economic benefits are a small part of our is y, because you see 79%

used to generate electricity for over two million citizens in the upper midwest. 13.5% is used to generate synthetic natural gas that is piped to over 400,000 homes in the east. and every time i have this opportunity to address the house, i like to tell a little piece of the story. you see 7.5% of that coal is used to generate fertilizer for our number one industry, agriculture. it's a great part of our culture. it's what i believe makes us very good at coal mining. let's talk about electricity generation for a moment. it's under such attack today. no industry is more under attack today than this by this administration. we are home to seven plants wned by rural electrical

cooperatetives and provides low cost electricity to our region. and beyond the direct employment of the high-paying jobs in this industry by the coal mines, generation plants, distribution companies, our low-cost coal provides the region with some of the cheapest utility rates in the country. today, i printed the most recent monthly report of electricity by state and north dakota and the state of washington have the lowest retail prices of any state in the country. can you imagine what a tremendous advantage that is in the global marketplace as we are trying to other industries as my friend from kentucky talked about for the opportunity for industries. we are home to the great plains plant which takes our coal and turned into gas and used by homes and industry. and in the process of supplying

that, 50% of that is cap furnished, the carbon is captured and shipped to canada. we capture half of the carbon and inject into old oil wells and generate more oil from it, long before carbon capture sequestration was cool. we saw it as a viable by-product of a product. another innovation is we use the ash from the plants, a by-product of the power plants. instead of it being emitted out of the stacks, it's collected and other entrepreneurial-minded individuals have discovered productive ways to utilize coal ash instead of sending it to landfills and creates a longer lasting and easier to work with concrete and used in our nation's infrastructure,

something we need very badly these days and used in paint and insulation for refrigerators, lumber, breaks and masonry and shingles and roofing materials. this is a by-product, not a waste product. and it is certainly safe. used to make better bridges like minnesota. dge in it is attached to coal ash concrete. and their ability to sell this by-product allows our utilities toll keep our electricity rates low for everyone. what about the environment? it's the land and water that concerns the regulations that are coming out of industries. i love talking about our environment. i submit to you, mr. speaker and to our colleagues, that very few places on earth are cleaner and

greener. with with regard to our air, seven power plants, you would assume we would have dirty air. we meet all the standards that are prescribed by the e.p.a. we are proud of that. and by the way, remember those two counties, mers her and olive with five power plants, they received an a grade from the american lung association for their clean air in their annual report for 2012. the reclamation of our mined lands. before the federal government passed the surface mining act, the state of north dakota passed its own laws which were stricter, higher standards. we return our land to pre-mining use. i wish every member -- i wish our president could come to north dakota and see how good

america could be and see how we reclaim our land because we land our land, we are farmers and ranchers. our mines we take great pride and invest vast resources in protecting our environment. our companies have won many awards for stewardship. coal miners and employees enjoy not om high-paying jobs, they breathe the air, drink the water and work the land. they are environmental scientists, truck drivers, the care of our natural resources is more to us than the e.p.a. and we do it well. we have proven for centuries, you don't have to compromise quality of life for a high standard of living. we are an all the aabove state and i'm proud of it and proud to be here with you, my colleague

from ohio, mr. johnson, and to tell the story one more time about the importance of this industry and if the war on coal is what is being waged, it's worth fighting for, it's for our future, thank you. mr. johnson: the point that you just made and that our colleague from kentucky made, it's not simply a war on coal, it's a war on american jobs. it's a war on the american way of life. we have to stand. mr. speaker, i'm proud now to yield some time to another one of our colleagues who no one in the house knows more about the impacts of the coal industry to the economy, of her state, her region than does our colleague from west virginia, representative capito.

mrs. capito: thank you, mr. speaker and thank you, mr. johnson. i thank the gentleman from ohio to talk about coal to talk about energy, talk about jobs, quality of life in our state, north dakota, kentucky, ohio, west virginia. west virginia is the second-largest coal-producing state in the country and part of who we are and has been for many, many years. and living in west virginia and being home as we were in august, there's a lot of pestism in the entire state. not just about coal, if you are a coal miner or directly involved, it's the whole community. it's the whole area, it's the whole region. and there's a feeling that the president through his policies has picked winners and losers and our region is going to lose and the job issue, we are seeing hundreds of jobs, a mine closed a week before, 250 miners, but

then it's the transportation, the truck driver, the stop-and-go owner, the oil and gas marketer, or the electrician, the pipes, all the things -- equipment manufacturers, everything. it's not just about those 250 jobs, it's a multiplying effect in our region of west virginia. in west ance of coal virginia and nationwide gives us potential. we are fighting an old fight. it's no longer part of the future. we have to make it a part of the future, because it makes good sense, producing more domestic energy means reliable, means affordable supply of power and energy. i think about a state like mine that has a lot of folks living on fixed incomes, a lot of older folks. when they see their electric

bill, they are having trouble now meeting that challenge of ng for that, making choices food for e or food or their pet or whatever is important to them because of the high cost now. that's just going to go up and up and up. if we disenfranchise ourselves in this country of our most abundant resource and that is coal. the school systems in our state, if you don't have the tax revenues in our state that coal produces, whether it's natural gas, we have a lot of gnat tral gas in our state, but if we don't have the tax revenues here, this just woons county commissioners and that to me is one of the consequences that

never gets talked about that really will harm a way of life, a future for the children. let's talk about the potential. we have been exporting a lot of coal. and importing -- and by doing that, we create jobs because we are exporting our coal and i see nothing wrong with exporting coal to our allies because exporting energy means we are producing the resource. bloomberg news reported that germany, germany will start up more coal-fired-power stations this year than at any time in the past 20 years. when we think about nerm guy, someone who is environmentally conscious, they have a healthy green party over there. they are considered to be cutting-edge when it comes to conservation and clean energy. yet they're building more coal-fired power plants in their country than we have in the last 25 years.

. the president said if you build coal-fired power plant we will bankrupt you. we've heard it. it will be impossible to build or it will plant bankrupt you to do it. one of his advisors has said a war on coal is what this country needs. ow can you say that a war on an industry with thousands of jobs is what we need? they provide good jobs and cheap energy for people on fixed incomes and for businesses. cheaper energy will create jobs in other industries as well.

and it has. you don't have to look far to see the administration's attack on coal. we know about the e.p.a.'s unprecedented action of retroactively pulling a validly issued clean water permit. that was shocking on the face of it. they said, oh, we've done that before. well, when you look at it, maybe once, maybe a long time ago but this was a 10-year process, millions of dollars to get this permit it was yanked out from thunder company. and who is going to invest in an industry when you're in deage of losing a permit red ro actively after you've jumped through all the hoops, met all the standards, worked with the corps, done all the things you're supposed to do and still the administration will come become and take your permit back. the administration has attacked the use of coal. crent -- recent figures say that coal units across 33 states are closinging and

they're closing in our state and we can see it. it's a source of great concern. in 2012, the e.p.a. proposed a new source performance standard. they backed off from it. it would place coal plants and large natural gas plants under the same standard for carbon dioxide standard. we hear they're going to create two standards but the standard for coal will be unbeatable, the technology is not there this is where if we look at the future, where the real future lies for our abundant resource, coal. earlier this year they scrapped the 2012 proposal and the president instructed revised standards, basically what we're going to see on friday is, it's the same thing. it's like groundhog day, same thing, same rhetoric, same standards, same results. lost jobs, higher utility costs, seniors and others on

fixed incomes worried about how they're going to heat their homes or cool them in the hot summers. are very, very daunting in my state of west virginia. the truth is that without new perform an -- performance standards, carbon dioxide emissions in the united states are falling. let's talk about the rest of the world. at the same time, global emigs have increased by 1.4%. if the administration wants to impose cardon dioxide standards and regulations to harm the american economy, at a minimum it should act as part of an agreement with other couldn't res. the senate unanimously took that position in 199 when it passed a resolution sponsored by then-senator robert byrd of west virginia and current obama defense secretary chuck hagel which said the united states should not ratify the kyoto treaty unless specific standards were agreed upon to

limit emissions by developing countries. the byrd-hagel pins pl was commonsense in 1997 and remains so today. for that reason, i'll be introducing legislation that would delay the implementation of the new source rules for coal plants unless other countries that account for 80% of the total nonu.s.a. carbon dioxide emissions standards enact those standards so we are not disadvantaging our workers, our jobs, our economy, our seniors, our folks who have manufacturing jobs in small businesses. the american people want us to work together. they realy do. we hear that when we're out. it's -- republicans, democrats, inexcellents, nonparties, old, young, educated, less educated, blue collar, white collar, they want us to work together. they want commonsense policies. they want an energy policy that creates jobs, that includes everything that is an all of

the above energy plan. and that's what we want. that's what we're fighting for. the president stood up here in january and said he was for all of the above energy. on friday, he's going to say all of the above except coal. which is abundant in the heartland of america. so with that, i would urge my colleagues on the floor tonight to think about coal and how -- i think -- i know -- i'm running short on my time i want to say that some states, some states do not realize what their portfolio is in coal. i looked up florida. 22% of the energy that is -- the power generation in florida, 22% of that is coal. yet you hear many of the florida delegation just right on board with the climate change philosophy of this president. their renewable portfolio in the sunshine state is slightly

over 2%. the renewable portfolio in the state of west virginia that has some of the most abundant resources in the country is at least twice that. it goes back to actually do what you say and say what you do. and so i think that we need to work with our colleagues, educate our colleagues about what a great role coal plays across this country even if you.net mine it in your region, you're using it, you're powering it, your seniors in florida are using it to cool themselves down on a hot summer day. with that, i would say i look forward with dread on friday to see what the new e.p.a. administrator has come forward with because i feel it's going to pick winners and losers in this country and our region and really our own domestic energy supply and in some ways our domestic energy security is going to come, is going to be disadvantaged. that to me in a time of high

unemployment new york a time of more part-time jobs being created than full-time, we're going to create -- going to turn our back on an industry that looks to do et better, cleaner, more effectively, to do it with education, to ememployee the next generation in an industry that's been part of the back bone of this country and surgeonly of our region. with that, i yield back and thank the gentleman for having e. mr. johnson: i thank the gentlewoman for yielding back. certainly we can see the passion she brings to the table as well. i think one of the things that's important for the american people to understand is this notion of energy independence and security. we hear those terms a lot, but not everybody understands what those terms really mean and how

it affects them, their families, their future. and i think -- i think there's some lessons that can be learned about america's past that would help us understand how energy independence and security might affect our future. i'd like to spend a little time talking about that and i think to do so, i want to set the stage just a little bit. y taking us back to march of 2011, when right here in this chamber, the prime minister of australia addressed a joint session of congress. she came to this chamber and started her speech off by say, you know, i remember being a young girl, sitting on my living room floor watching neil

armstrong and buzz aldrin land on the moon thinking to myself, wow. those americans can do anything. she went on to talk about erica's -- and australia's engagement in world issue. how america stood alongside of and often in front of australia during world war ii. at the end of her speech she summarized by saying, you know, i'm not that young girl anymore. today i'm the prime minister of our country. and yet still today i believe that americans can do anything. and when she said that phrase the second time, this notion that americans can do anything, you could have almost heard a pin drop in this chamber. there was a hush as members

from the senate, from the president's cabinet, dignitaries, military leaders, members of the house sort of took a collective cleansing breath, sucking that air in, that notion, that americans can do anything. it's not like we don't believe it. it's certainly not that we haven't proven it. but we don't hear it these days. we're certainly not teaching it to future generations the way we once did. you see, when president kennedy launched us on that great vision to put a man on the moon in 10 years, he engaged every fabric of our society. our scientific community, our technological community, our academic community, our military, our economic will, . r political will

and he said before the american people, he said, we're not doing these things because they're easy. in fact, we're doing these things because they're hard. and because by doing these ings we're going to invent and innovate and discover things that we might not have discovered otherwise. i'm paraphrasing what president kennedy said. but that was the message that he delivered to the american people. and he did such a good job of rallying the american people around this vision of american exceptionalism and that day, that we didn't make it to the moon in 10 years, we made it to the moon in eight. and we saw one of the most expansive and innovative periods in american history unfold right before our very

eyes. and we still see the benefits of that era today. the cell phones that we carry around, the flat screen tv's we watch, the computers that we use. the g.p.s. systems that navigate us from place to place. even medical technology. communicating tknologies. -- technologies. so much innovation came out of that period of time. we have an opportunity in merica to harness that great american character of innovation just like president kennedy did. around an idea of energy independence and security. as my colleague from west virginia just pointed out, the president stood in this chamber and said that back in january. he advocated in his words for

an all of the above energy policy. one that includes all forms of energy. and yet his policies continue to do right the opposite, particularly where the coal industry is concerned. what if we had a national energy policy that went somein like this? starting today, america is setting a goal to become energy infeint and secure in america by the year 2020. and we're going to harvest the vast oil and gas resources that we have. experts say we have more of that resource now than any nation on the planet. we're going to expand our nuclear footprint. it's the cleanest form of energy on the planet. 're going to invest in and

advocate for alternative forms energy like wind and solar, biofuels, hydroro -- hide row, but we're going to let the market troif those innovations. and yes, we're going to continue to mine and use the vast coal resources we have because we've got enough coal in this country to fuel our energy needs for generations. it's the most affordable, most reliable form of energy that we know. but we're not going to stop there. we're going to have a regulatory process that requires that regulatory agencies like the e.p.a. become partners in progress with america's industries and businesses. rather than just throwing up barriers and saying no. if there's a reason to say no fopu