akin: i appreciate, congressman gohmert, you know, those of us who know congressman gohmert, i know my colleagues do, know that he has a gift of persistence. i recall one of his more persistent moment, right here on this floor, when there was a bill that i would say is probably the second worst bill i've seen, it's only half as bad as this bill, and it was a bill that was amended with 300 pages of amendments at 3:00 in the morning, i think it was the late part of spring of this last year. i remember gohmert was -- had the same sense of persistence. he got this idea that maybe if we're going to vote on a bill, that it ought to be here in the chamber because there is a rule that the bill we're debating and voting on is supposed to be in the chamber. i remember just asking, is it north, south, east, or west. it was like a kid looking for a button hidden in the room somewhere. he's back and forth and back and forth, trying to find -- finally they said, the bill is right up there on that desk he went up and looked for it and guess what, it wasn't there. i don't know, people like to hide thi

gohmert: that's exactly right. the president has mentioned, states require you to buy car insurance. the fact is, you buy insurance for the privilege as the law is determined to drive on the road. you don't have to drive to live. to just live in america. if this bill passes, you will have to buy insurance just to live in america or you will be fined, you will be hammered with extra amount of money you'll have to pay. let me finish one other thing about that insurance. there is no state in the united states of america that requires anyone to insure their car for damages to their own car or damages physically to themselves. . the only requirement is for damage you do to someone else. this will be breaking new ground, never done in history, never envisioned by the constitution, not anywhere in the enumerated powers. you have to buy insurance on yourself just to live. i yield to my friend. mr. akin: you got to the point that i was going to ask. you were not only an attorney, but also served as a judge as well as a cong

congressman gohmert. mr. gohmert: thomas jefferson said the natural course of things is for government to gain . a great point this morning in talking this morning when he said people know in america that if you add 30 million people to the same health care coverage, you're not going to save money. if you were to save money by adding 30 million people to our health insurance or medicare, then as he said, then we might as well say, you know what? we'll insure everybody in china and that will get us out of the deficit. it's not true. it doesn't work. we have to be practical and stop government from taking over where liberty is yielding. mr. akin: i have a question. do you think the guy that came up with the idea that if we add people who are uninsured to the health care situation it's going to save money, maybe was the same guy that said the economy will get better if you spend more money. i thought maybe they were twins or something like that. dr. fleming, i have a minute. mr. fleming: i just want to touch on

gohmert decided the democratically elected senate is tactual problem. is we don't democratically elect senators. so state legislatures would pick senators from here on out instead of the regular citizen riffraff in the states choose their own senators by voting. >> the 17th amendment took out the last check and balance on usurpation of states rights. we have 39 states upset, wanting to do something and not have another unfunded federal mandate coming down their throats. this will do it. let's get an amendment that gets the balance back into the country and the constitution before this congress destroys what's left. >> in other words take the 17th amendment to the constitution, chew on it for a while, swallow, allow it to to travel through the narrow passage of the legislative process where it is broken down to smaller molecules, wait 24 to 27 hours and dump it out. only then would you have a louie gohmert style democracy where democratically elected legislators no longer take votes in favor of something they campaign to do-do. we can't move forward unti

my good friend from texas, congressman gohmert. mr. gohmert: looking at the chart you have there with the quote about reconciliation, it brings us back to what is being discussed, the reporters all out here in the hall, been there for much of the night, they've started going away, apparently they're thinking there's not going to be any agreement. what people need to understand what is being pushed here, called reconciliation, what a misnomer, reconcile? that's not what happens. the senate has passed a bill and they're not going to get 60 votes to do a new bill, so they're trying to push the house into passing exactly what the senate did, but we got fine, upstanding pro-lifers like bart stupak and a dozen others, and they say, if you are going to have a bill that pries tax money out of the hands of people from people who believe with all the their heart, as i do, that that's immoral, to kill unborn children, and you're going to take their money and use it to do that, then we can't vote for this bill. so what we hear being discussed is,

gohmert: thank you very much. i would like to follow up on that with something our friend across the aisle said before us tonight, he said that when this bill passes, we'll have a lot to run on. and i agree. i think they'll need to be running a great deal after this bill were to pass. because the vast majority of americans don't want it to pass. that's very clear. so you ask yourself, why would the majority of the house of representatives and the senate and the president try to cram a bill down the throat of the majority of americans that don't want the bill when it could hurt them politically? well there is so much government in this bill that they know if this bill passes then the government intrusion, whether you want to call it socialism or progressivism, it's the government taking over such a massive part of our lives, basically taking over our lives, but i would want to point out, page 100 of the senate bill, why were the unions so happy to jump on this? unions are beginning to have -- look at their health i

gohmert: they don't. and there is no reason to believe that anything could happen other than what we have already seen. they are not going to have 60 votes to do this. why they are trying do it on a reconciliation gimmick. mr. lungren: is the gentleman aware of whether or not the language that arparticular late the stupak amendment or the language that would articulate something close to the stupak amendment would be allowed under the tight controls of reconciliation? mr. gohmert: it's hard to know. i believe if the speaker tells bart stupak we are going to get the amendment -- your stupak amendment passed in the house through reconciliation, we'll get it done, and we should get it done in the senate, i'm sure if she tells him that she'll get it done in the house, then she probably will. but there is no way on this earth that she can guarantee what will happen in the senate because it's not going to happen. i yield. mr. lungren: in other words, if one were to preserve the stupak amendment, it would be to

gohmert: thank you, madam speaker. i continue to sound about a cry on this because since 1913, the states have had no way to prevent usurpation of states' rights or do anything about unfunded mandates that were crammed down their throats. the constitution provided for that, in that it said, the state legislatures would select the u.s. senators. and as long as that was the case, every u.s. senator knew if they created an unfunded mandate and took away states' rights or did anything to harm the states' powers that were granted to them under the united states constitution, this would yank that senator back and he would never come back to the u.s. senate and probably would never get elected to the house of representatives. that was the check and balance that the constitution provided. since 1913, when that was repealed through the 17th amendment, there's not been any check or balance on our power grab ausurpation of states' rights. it's time to do something about it and we saw that by the unfunded mandate requiring billion

gohmert: i will. mr. thompson: i believe some of our colleagues across the aisle are looking to vote for this senate bill and may agree with us on abortion and how wrong that is under the promise, the promise that it'll be fixed through a reconciliation bill. i want to talk a little bit more about what the probability of that is. we're going to be relying on the senate to bring a bill to us, pass a reconciliation bill to make these mixes that they're putting together these sweeteners these promises. best of my knowledge right now, we've passed a number of bills in this chamber in the last 15 months. by my calculations, we've sent over 200 bills to the senate that are just lingering in the senate. they haven't taken action on them. if there's 00 bill there is already that they haven't taken action on, what is the probability, what is the chance that they'll do a reconciliation bill that would make these fixs? i yield back. mr. king: reclaiming my time, i think we should spend a little time on the slaughter

gohmert, for 60 minutes. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. and i do appreciate that very much. it is an honor any time to come speak, have the privilege of speaking on the house floor. it's been a long day, it's been a long week. i fear there will be longer days, weeks and years in the future if tomorrow this bill passes. because some of us have seen socialized medicine firsthand. as an exchange student in the soviet union i've seen it back in 1973. i know where this all goes. i've seen where this plays out. and i know that my friends on the other side of the aisle believe their motivation is the highest and best. i understand that. i understand our friends that are pushing for government control of health care honestly believe the country will be better off if they can only get all health care, health insurance under the control of the federal government, then everyone is better off. i know they believe that and i believe -- i know they believe they're acting in everyone's best interest and -- in pushing for this. but that's not the basis for the founding of this country and f

gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. that's exactly what i want to do, i want to address some of the things and misstatements that have been made. i am also tired of the partisan bickering. i came in thinking that the democrats who said we want to work together, we're serious. we have been locked out of every single discussion except when the president came to preach to us. and he misrepresented, not intentionally, not lying, you know, perhaps some may have gave him the information, but this bill that we're going to vote on starts with a lie. it says this is an act that will modify first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the armed forces and for other purposes. it started with deceit. it's going to go and telling people they are going to have insurance, man, if that's true, if we can save money by adding 30 million people to our rolls, we need to go insure everybody in china and then we'll be done with the deficit. this bill is a disaster. 70-plus percent of the american people want us to throw it out and

that's not apparently not slogan that louie gohmert of texas a big state's rights guy was trumpetingn the house floor yesterday. nostalgia for the old dates. the time before the 17th amendment. that's right before the popular election of u.s. senators. back when they were picked by state legislators. here he is. louie gohmert. >> since the 17th amendment took out the last check and balance on use of patient of state's rights, it's time to get the balance back in place. we have 39 states upset, wanting to do something, and not have another unfunded federal mandate coming down their throats. this will do it. let's get an amendment that gets the balance back into the country and the constitution before this congress destroys what's left. >> louie i know, just when you're talking about. i remember when the texas state legislature threw sam houston out of the u.s. senate because he believed in the union. now for the number, statistician who predicted the 2008 popular vote. has a new model. per his calculation what are republicans' chances of winning back the u.s. senate? 10%. republicans

gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. i very much appreciate this opportunity to speak here on the floor. the topic again will be health care because even though most of americans are more concerned about the economy, as am i, and jobs, because the president keeps trying to shove this thing into the lap of americans, actually it will control the lap of americans, we have to deal with this until we can start over, start fresh, get the special interest groups, the unions, a.r.p., those people who have been meeting in the last few weeks, behind closed doors, away from c-span cameras, getting special deals for themselves, we start over, we start fresh and the number-one most important aspect is not the unions, it's not aarp, it is retired people, it is seniors, it's americans across the country, it's the poor, it's the wealthy, it's everybody. those people who are united states citizens, those are the number-one concern, should be under a newly negotiated bill. i just got sent a copy of an email that's gone all over the count

gohmert: mr. speaker, i do rise in tribute to charlie wilson. he was a constituent of mine. he was an inspiration to me. for those who don't know, he was born in trinity, texas and had education at sam houston state university. he attended the u.s. naval academy. he loved this country. he was willing to lay down his life for this country. between 1956 and 1960, charlie wilson served in the united states navy, attained the rank of lieutenant. and the man knew about defending america. it was a part of his heart and soul and was something he carried with him throughout his life. his political career began in 1960 when he was elected to the texas house of representatives and as my friend, mr. edwards, mentioned actually, the official version is, it began in 1960 when he was elected to the house of representatives in texas, but actually it did begin when his neighbor poisonned his dog and charlie got so active as a young high school kid, he started taking people to the polls to make sure there were enough people to defeat the man that poisonned his dog. that was his start in poli

gohmert today for five minutes and mr. mccotter, march 11 and 12, five minutes each. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? >> i ask unanimous con sent that today following legislative business and any special orders heretofore entered into, the following members may be permitted to address the house for five minutes to revise and extend their remarks an include therein extraneous materials. ms. woolsey, five minutes, mr. defazio, five minutes, ms. kaptur, five minutes, mr. ortiz, five minutes, mr. gene green, five minutes, mr. chet edwards, five minutes, mr. charlie gonzalez, five minutes, mr. hendrix five minutes, and ms. eddie bernice johnson for five minutes. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. under the speaker's announced policy of january 6, 2009, and under a previoused orer of the house, the following members are recognized for five minutes each. mr. bright of alabama. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. ortiz: i ask unanimous consent that the time be yielded to us, i don't

gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker.have seen for some time the federal government since 1913 you supering states' rights. this federal government, house and senate with the come policity with both republican and democratic presidents sending to the states unfunded mandates demanding that they come up with millions and billions of dollars that they didn't have, just out of the blue. we now come up with one that many states believe it will bankrupt them. how did we get here? well, in 1913, the constitutionally sanctioned process of electing senators was changed by the 17th amendment. that was put in the constitution after great debate. and what it required was, that the state legislatures, the states select, not the overall populations of the states but the state legislatures they chose would select the u.s. senators. that was a check and balance on the federal government's usurpation of states' senators because if anyone came up and voted an unfunded mandate, he was going to be quickly recalled as happened before. and i

gohmert. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. gohmert: thank you, mr. speaker. true of the examples been given here today of children that lost their lives, children who have suffered is untenable. there is nobody in this body that i can imagine would think that that was appropriate. of course it's not. our hearts go out to the families. all of us who have raised children have children go through school. you know, i have a great fear of something like that. but there was a fear that our founders had. there was a fear of coming together for the constitutional convention because they were afraid that it would allow for a constitution that would set in motion a federal government that would continue to take away the powers of the people and the local government and the state government. so the only way they were ever to come together on this constitution was to assure the people there that if they would pass a constitution they would put together 10 amendments to make sure that the federal government would never do the very things we're doing here. there is no stat

gohmert. mr. gohmert: mr.speaker, i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks in opposition to this government takeover of health care in this so-called health care bill. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman will be charged. the gentleman from california reserves. the gentlelady from new york has 3:55 remaining. ms. slaughter: i yield one minute to the the gentleman from virginia, mr. connolly. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. connolly: we have reached a historic crossroads. we can choose to send our nation on the path of improving towards health health insurance and finally containing the cost of that care or we can continue on the road of the status quo threatening to leave most families without basic care and bankrupting the engine of our economy. this bill in front of us today, this historic bill meets the tests my constituents set for it, will it bring down premium costs for families and small businesses? yes, it will. will it reduce

gohmert: thank you, madam speaker. dramatic times require dramatic actions. a party of the constitution that hasn't been used since its inception, article 5, the part that says on legislatures of 2/3 of the several states, congress shall call in a convention of proposing amendments. since the 17th amendment took out the last check and balance on use of states' rights, it's time to get the balance back in place. we have 39 states upset wanting to do something and not have another unfunded federal mandate coming down their throats. this will do it. let's get an amendment that gives the balance back into the country and the constitution before this congress destroys what's left. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the house will stand in recess subject to the call of th revelation. and the senate parliamentarian will be asked to rule. in some cases you will hear arguments from both sides. another case is the points will be raised on the floor. and you will have to make a ruling from there. a host o

gohmert: i thank my friend, dr. burgess, and i can assure it's not indulgence but a pleasure and honor to hear someone so ngable about this very issue that is being brought to a vote tomorrow. this is big and if bem have heard the president talk back in 2007 going into this campaign for president in 2008, he made very clear and he's made it very clear that he would sign a bill like this that would be the first step towards socialized medicine. he said this will be the first step. canada didn't get there in one step. you need this step and then you can transition into the full what's really socialized medicine. and in his speech today to encourage democrats to get on board, he said these words, this is the single most important step that we have taken on health care since medicare, absolutely. absolutely, it is. and that's the step he was talking about two years ago, that this is the first step and then we move into full socialized medicine where the federal government controls everything about your health care. it's

gohmert: thank you, madam speaker. i appreciate so much the points my friend from california has been making. here there have been discussion about the health care and why the house want to take that over for the american people. it really is highlighted by something i ran into just this morning at the white house. we know from the prior hearings that were held that apparently the social secretary had a meeting with people with security at the white house and decided to change protocol so she wouldn't be there. so some people got waived in that shouldn't have gotten waived in -- waved in and as a result what has happened now when members of congress used to be -- it used to be if you gave 24 hours' notice with a social security, date of birth, all that kind of thing you could get six people into the white house at 8:00, 7:45, something like that the next morning. well, now that -- this white house, that was changed. they want 48 hours. ok, fine. as a result of the incompetent handling over letting people into the white

gohmert: thank you, madam speaker. madam speaker, this bill is based on so many fictions it should not be passed. one is that we are going to do a rule and then that is going to be self-effectuating and that's going to pass the bill. that's a fiction. it ought to be an up or down vote on this bill. that's -- if you read the very basics on this bill from the senate, it says, resolve the bill from the house of representatives, h.r. 3590, entitled an act to amend the inturnal revenue code of 1986 to modify the first time home buyers credit in the case of members of armed forces. they ought to pass this on the backs of the armed forces. this should not be passed by anyone unless they eat it. if they eat it, then i'm in favor of them passing it. otherwise don't pass it. i yield back. . the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentleman from oklahoma rise? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. >> madam speaker, hig