mcclintock: no. it has to be negotiated. in fact, if i just read the text, i think this will answer the question. mrs. napolitano: thank you. reclaiming my time. the chair: the gentlelady from california controls the time. mrs. napolitano: thank you, sir. thank you to my colleague. the technical amendment also makes a standard correction into the language passed out in committee and while we were not consulted in the drafting of this amendment, we don't oppose the amendment as it does nothing substantial and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlelady yields back the balance of her time. the gentleman from california. mr. mcclintock: thank you. mr. chairman, if i could now answer the question of the gentlelady that she didn't seem to want to hear, it is this. this act applies, the act of july 2, 1956, to all contracts in the c.b.p. under this legislation. that legislation states the secretary of the interior shall include in any long-term contract hereafter entered into, if the oth

mcclintock. no, ms. bass is next in line. >> oh. okay, there you go. thank you for your testimony this morning. earlier when we opened, i believe the chair mentioned the need for the president to present solutions instead of just criticizing. i just wanted to mention that yesterday the president sent his start-up america legislative agenda to accelerate start-up and small business growth to congress. parts of the agenda have already won bipartisan support in the house, including allowing small business to businesses to raise capital, raise taxes on capital gains and key investments and small businesses. i think this is an example of the types of economic stimulus we should be pursuing. and i'm hoping that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will bring the president's package to the house floor for a vote soon. i did want to ask you about states and the fiscal pressure on states, which i do see as a major obstacle to sustainable recovery. at the start of 2012, 29 states have already projected a gap of about $44 billion for fiscal year 2013. and

mcclintock: mr. chairman, the devastation of the central valley of california occurred because of the breaking of a federal promise, a federal agreement. the gentleman from california says, oh, it wasn't an agreement at all, it was a suggestion. well, that's not what the interior secretary said at the time. he said a deal is a deal. it turns out there is a need for additional water it will come at the expense of the federal government. the senator who carried the conference report on the senate floor said it was a temporary measure until additional water was brought online. this bill redeems that promise. the amendment offered by the gentleman from massachusetts would have us break that promise forever. we keep haring, well, this is then, this is now, science has changed, social policy. if that's the case then the federal government's promises are worthless. they mean nothing. it was a promise agreed to by all parties. it was broken by the federal government. what they're referring to is not science.

mcclintock talked about in extolling the virtues and the record of former president reagan in helping to bring us out of a significant recession at the time, i want to just read a quote. we're going to close the unproductive tax loopholes that have allowed some of the truly wealthy to avoid paying their fair share. some were understandable. but in practice, they sometimes made it possible for millionaires to pay nothing while a bus driver was paying 10% of his salary and that's crazy. it's time we stopped it. now if i was going to quiz the members here on who might -- we might have attributed that quote to, i bet it wouldn't be at the much to anyone's mind that that was from a speech by ronald reagan at north side high school in atlanta, georgia, on june 6th, 1985. >> no one would have guessed that warren buffett would say the same thing. >> exactly. he said i would raise rates immediately on taxable income, including dividend and capital gains. and for those who made $10 million or more. i would suggest an additional increase in rate. and that was on august 14th, 2011. so that prefac

. >> the comments of representative mcclintock of california. the house taking up the measure today. watch live coverage on c-span and on the web at cpan.org. as we said earlier the house speaker making a rare appearance on the house floor urging for passage of the bill which essentially would re-establish water access for thousands of california residents along the san joaquin valley. you are listening to "washington today" on c-span radio. >> david gregory, george stephanopoul stephanopoul stephanopoulos. >> bob sheefr. >> hear five talk shows replayed sunday afternoon on c-span radio starting at noon eastern. "meet the press," "this week," "fox news sunday" "state of the union" and "face the nation." top issues, key political figures and journalist round tables brought to you as a public service by the networks and c-span. replays of the sunday network tv talk shows sundays starting at noon eastern on c-span radio. >> wcsp fm washington. around the country on channel 119. >> the actions you take in the short run whether they be infrastructure

mcclintock. >> thank you, mr. chairman.>> the ranking member, i think, put his finger on the great question confronting this committee and t for that matter, confronting nd this nation. he made two statements, one of r which i disagree the other which i heart illy agree with. you said that this t administration had inherited thr worst economy since the great depression. and i agree it inherited a terrible mess, but i seem to remember a time more recently when we had double-digit unemployment, double-digit inflation, mile-long lines mi around gas stations, interest oi rates at 21.5%.nt that was the end of the carter administration. we elected ronald reagan who adopted policies quite the opposite of this administratione perhaps the reason the ranking i member doesn't recognize it is because they didn't last very long.oesn't those policies produced one of the great economic expansions in our nation's history.ne o in fact, phil graham recently published an article in "the wall street journal" in which hc estimated tha

mcclintock that more information is helpful. we just don't want to ask for the information the way that we only get one side of the story. i hope our colleagues are going to vote for the amendment a little later on the floor that says we should also try and figure out what the economic impact of major investments in infrastructure is to the appropriations process. they have removed that analysis from this bill. in addition to the fact it's very curious that when it comes to tax policy they have written this in a way that when c.b.o. does an analysis of again the major decision that would be made by this body in the next few years, whether or not to extend some or all of the 2001, 2003 tax cuts, that will show no impact on economic growth because of the way they have written this legislation. when in fact we know at least from earlier c.b.o. reports that in the out years, 10 years out, it will be a drag on economic growth because it will increase the deficit when you allow the tax cuts for the folks at the top to go on and on and

mcclintock, for five minutes. mr. mcclintock: mr. speaker, today i have introduced a bill to name the united states post office in california in honor of united states marine corps private first class victor do. this young man was only 20 years old when he left his family and friends in late september of 2010 for helmund province, afghanistan. just three weeks later on october 13 private do was killed in action when his convoy was ambushed. victor grew up dreaming of becoming a marine. he loved military history. he was fully aware of the mortal dangers he would face. yet when he was offered a posting to a ceremonial position stateside, he turned it down. he believed his duty and destiny was to fight -- to keep the fight away from our shores, away from his family and his country, and so he chose combat even when he had been offered safe and honorable service at home. what did he sacrifice to give our country a little more security and to give another country a fleeting chance at redemption? he had everything in the world to live for.

mcclintock: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, in 2009 and again in 2010 hundreds of billions of gallons of contracted water were expropriated from california farms and instead dumped into the pacific ocean in the name of the delta smelt. this tragic policy followed hundreds of thousands of acres of some of the most fertile and productive farm lapd in america. -- farmland in america. it threw thousands of hardworking families into unemployment. it devastated communities throughout the region. and it created the spectacle of unemployed farm workers standing in food lines to receive carrots imported from china in a region that just a short time before it produced much of american grown fruits and vegetables. and it contributed to rising grocery prices families felt far beyond the congressionally created dust bowl of california's central valley. in the last congress the then minority republicans begged and pleaded for hearings to address this catastrophe, the majority turned a deaf ear. last year we returned as the new house

mcclintock: mr. chairman, this bill presents us with a very simple question. is it just conceivelyably possible that the congress has -- conceivably possible that the congress has passed a spending bill that has great scrutiny? the answer to this question may allude members of this house but i say that it is self-evident to everyone else. a country's whose finances is far out of control as ours suffers from not too many checks and balances on spending but too few. now opponents of this bill talk about this some new and radical idea. many states operate with a genuine line-item veto and have for generations. for those states it's been a vital tool to control their spending, and those previsions were far more stringent than what is proposed here. in conformance with our constitution, this bill simply invites the president to call to congress' attention those spending items that he recommends that we give additional thought to and puts a six-week hold on those funds while we do so. in fact, from 1801 to 1974 the president had the recognized authority to impound e