mr. broun: mr. chairman, i love beaches and my friend from florida's beaches as well as my friend from washington's beaches. as well as my friend from oregon's beaches. in these hard economic times i think it's just absolutely incredible that we're spending this kind of money, almost $1 billion over the next 10 years, just for beach replenishment and i'd like to yield a minute of time to my friend from oregon. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. blumenauer: i appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting me to speak on this and he's raising an issue that i think is sensitive and frankly deserves far more consideration than it has been given by this congress. there is great debate, frankly, about this science of artificial beach construction. part of the concern about the cycle of the federal government routinely bailing people out is in fact some locational decisions in the first place. the cost allocation can be quite variable. there have been real questions about some of the projects t

mr. moran: mr. chairman, niece programs put together by the national oceanic and atmospheric administration are designed to remenish fish stocks. they assign shares to individuals, cooperatives, other fishing communities because what we have seen that has resulted in depleted fish stocks and overfishing is a race to fish where the concern is that stock is being depleted so they run out to get what's left. noaa is trying to intervene and suggest that we should divide up what's left, what we scientifically understand is left and try to cooperate. now, i can understand there are many fishing communities that don't want noaa's intervention but they have been successful in ensuring sustainable fisheries and preventing overfishing and creating more stable and lucrative fishing jobs in communities from alaska to florida. they bring a lot of economic and biological benefits. they eliminate what many think are dangerous race to fish or what i call derby conditions and they improve safety for fishermen. noaa

mr. akin: mr. chairman, my concern is that the department of defense may interpret this language as direction from congress to terminate e.f.v. in this year regardless of any recommendations made by congress during debate on the fiscal year 2012 budget. no matter how this issue is resolved by congress in fiscal year 2012, orderly conclusion of the fiscal career 2011 activities that are already under contract and well under way is essential for the nation to get a usable product for its $3 billion investment. my reading of this language is that it provides sufficient flexibility for the department to continue through s.b.d. and we encourage the department to do just that. is the intent of the committee to provide sufficient flexibility for the department to continue the activities related to the e.f.v.? mr. young: i say to the gentleman, mr. chairman, it is the intent of the committee to provide that flexibility. in fact, it is my hope that the department exercises this flexibility to finish the act

mr. king: mr. chairman, i'd yield myself 30 seconds. and it's a little bit amazing to me the gentlelady can get so focused on this. i'm the one that should be focused in it in that way and animated. the taxpayers should be animated at this. they should understand that when the federal government sets union scale and drives the price up and the taxpayers can't afford it, it's not about a race to the bottom. the quality of work for my workers was always there. we take care of our people 12 months out of the year with a benefits package. we're not hiring them out of the union hall for a day but you make us pay the prices as if we were. we uphold our workers and take care of them. we have the quality that's there. it's a matter of fact and proven, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentlelady from connecticut. ms. delauro: i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from hawaii, ms. hirono. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. hirono: mr. speaker, i rise to speak against this amendment. th

mr. fleming: mr. chairman, i would like to say in conclusion to my remarks and i thank the gentleman from iowa that tonight, we're all getting tired, we have debated for three days and three nights. but in that same period of time, think about the number of babies who have been killed through abortion, through a sterile area where a doctor goes in and we have the usual instruments and so forth and the fetus sucked out of the womb and the mom on with her life but we know statistics tell us that these mothers just don't go with their lives as suggested by the other side. the rate of depression, the rate of suicide, the rate of problems with future pregnancies. they increase dramatically after abortion. tonight should be the beginning of the ending of this horrible practice. with that, i yield back to the chair. the chair: for what purpose does gentlelady from florida rise. >> strike the last word. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for five minutes. ms. castor: we were hired by our neighbors to com

mr. hastings: mr. speaker, would you be so kind as to tell both sides the remaining amount of time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida has 17 minutes remaining. the gentleman from texas has nine minutes remaining. mr. hastings: thank you very much, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, if we defeat the previous question, i'll offer an amendment to the rule to provide that immediately after the house adopts this rule, it will bring up h.r. 11, the bill -- build america bonds to create jobs now act. to explain that further and to as she so desires, i'm pleased to yield one minute to the distinguished the gentlewoman from california, the minority leader, ms. pelosi. the speaker pro tempore: the distinguished minority leader is recognized for one minute. ms. pelosi: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman for yielding and thank him for his leadership in calling up h.r. 11, the bill build america bonds later. -- bonds, later. mr. speaker, it's very interesting to watch this debate because what yo

mr. leahy: mr. president, i ask consent that the call of the quorum be dispensed with. the presiding officer: without objection. under the previous order the nomination of amy totenberg to be united states district judge for the northern district of georgia is confirmed. the question is on the nomination of steve c. jones to be united states district judge for the northern district of georgia. mr. leahy: mr. president, i understand there has been a request for a -- a roll call on judge jones. although i would recommend if we have such, that it be unanimous, and i see the distinguished senator -- georgia senator isakson on the floor and i would ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote: vote: the presiding officer: are there any members wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, the ayes are 90, the nays are 0. and the nomination is confirmed. mr. leahy: mr. president, i move to reconsider. the pres

mr. rahal: mr. speaker i yield two minutes to a valued men of our administration on infrastructure, the gentlelady from hawaii. the speaker pro tempore: the the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. hirono: the legislation is constructs them to do the job they already do, construct laws passed by congress. i believe it is a component of successfully tackling the challenges we face as a nation. while i have no objection to this resolution, i question why we need to spend 9 1/2 hours debating what we should all unanimously agree on. mr. speaker, spending this much time on this resolution is like making sure we finish chewing our gum before we start walking. when just a few months ago we were doing both at the same time. take the american recovery and reinvestment act. for example, this legislation was passed as an unprecedented response to the most severe economic crisis our nation has faced since the great depression. we know that there was a lot of taxpayer money involved in this legislation

mr. smith: mr. speaker, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. smith: mr. speaker, since its enactment in 2001, the patriot act has been the object of so maun false allegations and exaggerations that the myths have overshadowed the truth. it's time to dispel the myths once and for all. let's begin with the myth that national security officials do not need these provisions to protect us from terrorist attacks. this is demonstrably untrue. numerous terrorist attempts in the last 10 years have been thwarted thanks to the intelligence gathering tools provided in the patriot act and other national security laws. fand congress fails to extend these provisions, set to expire on february 28, if will be on our shoulders if the need to stop the next attack is not collected. opponents claim that the expiring provisions of the patriot act violate the fourth amendment to the constitution. this too is false. each of the provisions at issue amends the f

mr. poe: mr. speaker, american missioners nancy and sam davis ran a charity in poor places in mexico. they were ambushed near the border by a road block of masked gunmen who opened fire on them. nancy was shot in the back of the head. sam bravely raced against oncoming traffic to the border while nancy sat in the passenger seat bleeding to death. nancy did not survive and died in mcallen, texas. the mexican government has already said they will not investigate this homicide. and the american government must hold mexico accountable. the narco terrorists continue to murder americans in lawless mexico and they will continue their terror on our side of the border if they are not stopped. they are international bandits. meanwhile our federal government continues to whistle by the graveyard of victims while the people in the border towns live in constant fear and danger. but it's just another day on the texas border. and that's just the way it is. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentl

mr. jones: mr. speaker, this amendment removes the new $400 million from the afghan restructure fund and would be returned to the spending reduction act. and i bring this amendment to the floor because of the frustration of the american people. here we are trying to find $400 million to put in an infrastructure fund for afghanistan which is borrowed money from the chinese to begin with, and not uncle sam's money and in addition to that, we are propping up a corrupt, dishonest government headed by president karzai. and at this time in america's history when we are having these debates tonight that i have heard all day long with the frustration with the members of congress from both parties that here we cannot balance the budget of this country and we are trying to find this money to go to the infrastructure of afghanistan and say to the american people, we can't help you if your infrastructure needs in your counties, towns and cities. it makes absolutely no sense to me and more important to me is to

mr. thomas, mr. holtz-eakin and mr. hennessey chose not to use that additional space. >> if i could, i see, unfortunately, my time is running out here -- >> [inaudible]d mr >> you did say in the report you determined government housing to policies were not a significant factor in the crisis. >> correct. >> clearly, there were strong dissents. so be it the affordable housing goals of fannie and freddie, hud's best practices, cra, you found no significant factor in the crisis?y >> so let me talk about each of these very quickly. let me tell you about fannie ana freddie, and be i just want to e say very quickly that a deeply flawed business model with thet implicit backing of the government was a bad model. the fact is that those entities used their political power to ward off effective regulation. we conclude that they did contribute to the crisis, but theys, were not primary. they did add healing to the housing balloon, but keep in mind they never represented a majority of the purchases of subprime securitizations emanat

mr. kelly: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. speaker, i'm here today because i represent those small business men trying to make a living in towns like erie pennsylvania. i got to tell you the rhetoric is off the charts. what we need to see now are results. until we get government's boot off the throat of small businesspeople, allow them to move forward, do we want to be in the game? heavens yes. so does everybody else. we need to realize that all these action taxes recreate come from businesses that are profitable and people who are working. if we are talking about growing an economy, and if we are talking about cutting spending, and i do agree cutting spending is important. we better wake up and start to smell the coffee. we have overregulated these people to the point they don't want to be in this game anymore. we've got to wake up. i repeat that because we are missing the boat on a very vital thing that's happening right now this this country. we need to get onboard with this. i got to tell you, insiders in this beltway talk

mr. bernanke and the joint chiefs of staff. i been on planes where generals had generals serving generals and that snds all wrong to me. i thank you, mr. chairman. i know it's a difficult job. thank you. >> thank you. >> just a very brief comment p t about the issue of shared sacrifice. it seems to me that, if i recall right, mr. rogers or even mr. dicks might be able to help me, i believe we have about 40% of the people in this country who pay no taxes whatsoever. and so when you talk about shared sacrifices, thosere people who are being given lots of things by the rest of us, but they certainly are not sacrificing in the sense that other people are who work a pay taxes. >> are you talking about -- >> thank you. >> thank you, mr. chairman. chairman rogers, appreciate all the time and effort your committee put into this, mr. dicks, certainly appreciate your input. you know, when we're elected on november 2nd, it was a clear mandate in regards to they want government to operate differently

mr. young: mr. chairman, in the interest of time, i will simply say we support this program. the former chairman, mr. dicks, supports it, mr. young supports it and the committee added additional funding. florida national guard had an extremely large return home and we understand the importance of the program. we support the gentleman and will continue to work with the gentleman. mr. dicks: i gee the yellow ribbon program has been an important program and we have worked tirelessly to make sure they are taken care of. i will work with the gentleman from vermont and the gentleman from florida to ensure the needs of our troops and families are met. and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. who seeks recognition? for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? . . >> i rise to offer an amendment preprinted in the congressional record and designated as amendment 495. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment 495 printed in the congre

mr. miller: mr. chairman, i rise to first very strongly oppose the gentleman's amendment and associate myself with the remarks of the gentlelady from southern california. before going to that, though, mr. chairman, i'd like to take a moment to express my deep appreciation to both the work -- mr. lewis: both of my chair mnds an ranking member, putting together what i consider to be an overall very fine bill. i know mike simpson's concern about those issues that relate to our environment and the interior especially, he's a fabulous chairman, assisted today by a very, very fine young person who is his staff director, not so young as he used to be, dave lestrang. but this fine bill also is put together by a cross section of great staffers who are doing all they can to improve the condition in which we live. i rise to oppose this amendment in no small part because mr. calvert and i over the years have shared the same problem. we live in a region that is surrounded by beautiful, beautiful mountains. it's a

mr. dreier: mr. speaker, we have the benefit of having my friend from gold river, my friend from anom any -- anomys on the floor if they would underscore the commitment that was raised by the gentleman from georgia that we would be diligently -- mr. speaker, i yield myself an additional minute and a half. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. dreier: i wod like to inquire of both my friends what kind of commitment they are prepared to make in dealing with this. we have gone for an entire year following the 315-97 vote passage of this measure without a single hearing being held. first i yield to my friend, the chrman of the crime subcommittee. mr. sensenbrenner: i thank my friend for yielding. i plan on doing with this re-authorization of the patriot act the same thing i did with the 2005 re-authorization of the patriot act. examine every one of the expiring provisions, let everybody speak their peace, and then let the hse of representatives

i would like to introduce mr. ford. >> welcome to the 47th annual cable car bell ringing competition. this is one of a kind. this is a comptation -- competition for the world championship and thank you for coming. i also have to thank our cable car grip men and conductors. every day they help move people around our city, they're great ambassadors and do a great job entertaining visitors to our fine city. we have two members from the mta board, bruce oka and malcolm hideke here today. i'd like to thank our judges. we have judges representing a lot of president businesses here in the union square area. with that, to all the mta employees and fine citizens of san francisco, thank you for joining us today and thank you for your support. >> matt ford, ladies and gentlemen. the bell ringing competition is a two-part event today. we have professionals competing for a number of prizes in the coveted title of world champion bell ringer. for the amateur portion we have executives from some of our local media outlets competi

mr. smith: since 1979, mr. speaker, brothers and sisters have been illegal in china as part of the barbaric one-child per couple policy. and for 30 years the united nations population fund has vigorously supported, funded, defended, promoted, and even celebrated these massive crimes against humanity. . under president reagan and president bush and president clinton, the shameful support and co-management of china's forced abortion policy. my concern this morning is an amendment that had been printed in the record but not offered, at least it has not been offered at this setting, i expect we'll see it later that would compel every american taxpayer to furnish $55 million to an organization that unapoll getically stood not with oppressed women but with the oppressors of women and the chinese killing machine more lethal, an organization that has whitewashed and defended these crimes against humanity. it is not only part of the planning of the chinese who run this program but they insist in the implementation of it

mr. frelinghuysen: mr. chairman, we support the gentlewoman's effort to ensure every taxpayer dollar is spent wisely and effectively. our committee has always been focused on that. effective recruiting is critical to the military's ability to attract new, qualified military men and women and maintain our all-volunteer force. the department of defense uses its sponsorship of nascar and other sporting events to create awareness of the different military services and the unique advantages and programs that come with serving our nation. quite frankly, mr. chairman, it's a great public-private partnership. nascar sponsorship has proven to be a very cost-effective recruiting tool with some estimates stating that for every dollar the military puts in nascar sponsorship, it gets $4 in equivalent in advertising through television, merchandise, and other outlets. we believe the dollars are well spent, and thus i oppose the amendment and yield to mr. mchenry of north carolina for any remarks he may have. mr. mchenry:

mr. dreier: mr. speaker, at this time, to respond to some of the comments that we've heard, i'm happy to yield three minutes to my hardworking colleague from gold river, kale, mr. lungren. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. lungren: i don't know whether we're in an episode of "alice in wonderland" here or not. just because you say something is true doesn't make it true. the gentlelady just spoke a moment ago and said we need to look at this, we need to crub this, yet she is asking her colleagues to vote against the rule to not even allow this to be brought up. what is the conclusion of that? what's the intimation of this? to allow the provisions to expire. not to have time to look at them but they would expire -- one legislative day left. these are three major provisions in our effort to fight against terrorism. these are the provisions that initially were put under a sunset by the gentleman from wisconsin when he was chairman of the committee and then later o

mr. terry: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. dicks: mr. chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from -- mr. dicks: i move to strike the requisite number of words. the gentleman has spoke twice on this issue, was that by unanimous consent? mr. terry: would the gentleman yield? mr. dicks: i want to answer my question first. the chair: the chair believes that the gentleman from nebraska spoke only once. mr. dicks: yield to me, please. mr. terry: i yield. i spoke one time right now. i don't know who you are confusing me with. mr. dicks: i thought you spoke twice, i'm sorry. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from -- for what purpose does the member from louisiana rise? >> move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. >> i rise in strong support of this amendment because i think if you look across the country, of course we had a water shed election in november, if you listen to the voters, and so many of us who did hold town hall meeting

mr. king: mr. chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. king: i have an amendment at the desk, number 266. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 266 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. king of iowa. the chair: the gentlelady from connecticut. ms. delauro: i reserve a point of order. the chair: the gentlelady reserves a point of order. pursuant to the order of the house of february 17, 2011, the gentleman from iowa, mr. king, and a member opposed will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa. mr. king: thank you, mr. chairman. amendment 266 is the amendment that has had a lot of discussion around this chamber and around this country and what it does is it recognizes the results of this c.r.s. report, mr. chairman. this report dated just last thursday, february 10, 2011. it took a long time to put all the numbers together in an official document that identified the money that are

mr. inouye: mr. president, i rise today in support of the levin amendment which i believe is far superior alter national to the stabenow amendment, as it currently stands. the levin amendment offered today by -- the amendment offered today by senator stabenow proposes to rescind $44 billion from unobligated balances of appropriated funds that are designated for specific purposes in various appropriations bills previously enacted by congress. the senator offers these rescissions in order to offset the loss of revenues resulting from their amendment. mr. president, this amendment is a perfect representation of what i expect to be a flood of similar amendments and stand-alone bills that seek to eviscerate the non-defense functions of the federal government. with the exception of the proposal from the junior senator from kentucky, which had the courage to list each and every cut that he proposed, i expect that many other bills and amendments will be blanket rescissions that leave it to the executive bran

mr. rogers. >> good afternoon, mr. chairman, and ranking member slaughter, members of the committee. and my colleague, mr. dix. i'm pleased to appear to present hr-1, the fiscal year 2011 continuing resolution. let me just cut to the chase. i'm here seeking an open rule, an open rule so that all members, republicans and democrats alike, have the opportunity to try to put forward their ideas to cut spending or move money around in thec r. while open rules have not been common for appropriations bills over the last four years, i believe and i'm sure mr. dix would agree, it's time we return to the practice of bringing appropriations bills to the floor under regular order. he and i have talked about that and have agreed that's what we both will strive to do. this legislation represents the largest reduction in nonsecurity discretionary spending in the history of the country and is a massive down payment on the new republican majority's commitment to drastically decrease discretionary funding in order to help our economy th

mr. woodall. >> thank you, mr. chairman. and i appreciate you gentlemen being here today and i appreciate the hard work you've been doing, mr. chairman, to take all the orders that you've been taking and try to do things as fair as you could. i did notice that as mr. mcgovern went through his list of things that he thought might have been cut too much there were only three things on his list that he didn't think got cut enough and he didn't think he could have gotten to this bill anyway. you didn't leave anything on the table and i'm grateful to you for that. that's the marching orders we got. >> we went into this with the idea that there should be shared sacrifice. we knew if we were to solve the problem of the deficit and the enormous dhaet we're incurring on our children and grandchildr grandchildren, if we were to tackle that we had to cut spending. and we had to cut it fairly. and we had to have no sacred cows. and there are no sacred cows. we've touched everybody except defense -- well, we actually cut on defense. and

>> mr. dave miliband? >> mr. speaker, everybody knows he's going to have to drop this ludicrous policy. now, let me give him the chance to do that this. >> nobody voted for this policy. 500,000 people have voted -- 500,000 people have signed a petition against the policy. why doesn't he -- why doesn't he when he gets up at the dispatch box not say he's postponing the sale but say he's canceling it? >> i think once again he wrote the questions before he listened to the answers. and i think the bandwagon has just hit a bit of a tree. >> may i take this opportunity to inform my right honorable friend and indeed the house that the public administration select committee to take -- is launch an inquiry into the big society. >> very good one. well done. does he share my hope that as we consider things like volunteering, promoting charitable giving, decentralizing public services that we will receive positive evidence from all sides of the house? >> i do and i'm sure like everything my right honorable friend it will be w

mr. frelinghuysen: mr. chairman, i oppose the gentleman's amendment, which adds, as we know, $50 million for arpa-e while cutting funding for fossil energy -- for the fossil energy program. the energy and water portion of this bill strikes a careful balance between national security, american competitiveness and the grave responsibility of deficit reduction. as written, this bill provides sufficient funding to keep arpa-e operational and active in fiscal year 2011 while we thoroughly evaluate the program and its future in the fiscal year 2012 appropriations process. arpa-e has shown some promise in advancing our competitiveness within the light of the tough tradeoffs we've had to make in this bill, and indeed they've been tough, i can't support further increased funding for arpa-e before we've had a broader discussion of the new program. further, to achieve this bill's historic levels of spending reduction, the bill has struck a finely tuned balance of support across programs within the department of energy

mr. reid: mr.president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask consent that the call of the quorum be terminated. the presiding officer: without objection, so ordered. mr. reid: mr. president, following any leader remarks, there will be a period of morning business until 3:30 today. senators during that period of time will be able to speak for up to ten minutes each. at 3:30, we'll moch to the patent reform act. at 4:30, the senate will turn to executive session to consider the nominations of amy tottenberg of scror juror to be united states district judge and steve jones of georgia to be united states district judge. the time until 5:30 will be equally divided and controlled in the usually form. at 5:30, senators should expect a voice vote on confirmation of the tottenberg nomination, to be followed by a roll call vote for the quftion of the jones nomination. the senate will consider the patent bill and consider the continuing resolution during that week's session. the presidi

mrs. hutchison: mr. president, i just to want say that i, too, support the nelson amendment and appreciate his working with the intelligence committee to -- and the judiciary committee to assure that all the bases were covered, and i will be supporting it as well. thank you. and i yield the floor. the presiding officer: the question is on nelson amendment number 58, as amended. the yeas and nays have been ordered. the clerk will call the roll. vote: vote: the presiding officer: has every member voted? does any member wish to change his or her vote? nelson amendment number 58 the amendment is agreed to 98 for, zero against. under the previous order, the motion to reconsider is considered made and laid upon the table. mr. rockefeller: mr. president? pyrite the -- the presiding officer: the senator from west virginia. mr. rockefeller: i ask unanimous consent that at 2:15 p.m. on this day, there be 20 minutes of debate equally divided in the usual form on the wicker amendment prior to the vote in relation to

mr. brady: thank you, mr. mr. brady: before i refuse to take your questions, i have an opening statement. that is one of the many clips we remember from the great communicator as we mark the 100th anniversary of his birthday, we reflect on his accomplishments, his leadership and tough economic times and his ability to bring us together with his good humor. during his presidency, ronald reagan walked across the aisle to cut tax rates and getting washington off the back of our job creators. he believed as he said, entrepreneurs and their small enterprises are responsible for all the economic growth in the united states. he said concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty. those two statements of president reagan's were never more true than today as we have a much greater and bigger washington bureaucracy than we could have ever imagined or afford. president reagan bleevets we grow our economy by getting washington out of the way, not spending more tax dollars. he knew that fiscal responsibility was key t

mr. dreier: mr. speaker, 18 days from now three key provisions of the patriot act are set to expire, leaving a gap in our national security framework. today's underlying legislation would temporarily, and i underscore the word, mr. speaker, temporarily extend these provisions to allow for the development of a long-term solution with the many questions that are out there. now, mr. speaker, with strong bipartisan support, the previous congress simply passed a blanket one-year extension without addressing any of the underlying challenges, questions and controversies. and, mr. speaker, i'm the first to admit that there are challenges, questions and controversies that relate to the patriot act. unfortunately, and again it was by a vote of 315-97, february 25 of last year, mr. speaker, and we went to that entire yew, -- through that entire year, but guess what? not a single hearing was conducted subsequent to the passage of that extension. not a single hearing over the past year has been held. now, i feel

mr. rothman: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, the republican side of the aisle, have suggested that america would be better off if we cut out foreign aid. in my opinion there could be nothing further from the truth, mr. speaker. cutting foreign aid from the united states to our allies and others we want to work with around the world is vital to u.s.'s national security. i'll say it again. our foreign aid that we give out, which by the way, what's the percentage of foreign aid in our budget compared to the whole budget? 1%. it's actually less than 1%. some people think it's 20% or 30%. it's less than 1% of a whole budget. what do we do with that foreign aid? we make alliances with trading partners. we make alliances with strategic military partners all over the world. i think most americans understand we still live in a very dangerous world. and we need allies and friends and partners. by the way, what does that foreign aid budget include? it also includes money for em

mr. jackson: mr. speaker, the book of matthew says, for where your treasure is, there your heart shall be also. that's the biblical prescription for judging the priorities of politicians -- politicians. we've seen it in the continuing resolution offered by my republican colleagues. when they're needed most, vital programs are on the chopping block. grants to states and cities for help with development, pell grants and much, much more. in the midst of the worst economy most of us have ever seen, we're cutting the legs of the unemployed, underemployed and financially insecure out from under them. it is clear these proposals did not consider the well being of the people. we must organize ourselves. the unemployed party is larger than the tea party. no jobs are promised, but i will put your story in the congressional record so our government, that is supposed to be of, for, and by the people, can begin to live up to the true meaning of its creed. resumesforamerica@mail.house.go v. thank you, mr. speaker.

mr. ken mcdonald.ons officer, please come forward to help me present the second place trophy. second place, ladies and gentlemen. mr. frank ware. and before we announce the winner i'm going to drag this out even longer. i'm going to take a moment to thank the kind people who made the 47th annual cable car bell ringing contest possible the the vice chair of the sfmt board of directors. and friends of the cable car music, union square association, trophy masters shanghai restaurant, ghirardelli chocolatesing, and the american automobile association and the $250 cash prize, deluxe sightseeing. let's bring up gilberto gad oy with the hand-crafted bell. and the winner is -- >> mr. leonard oates. congratulations. >> leonard oates. he retains the crown. [applause] that concludes the 47th annual cable car bell ringing contest. thank you, everybody, for coming. don't forget next year the 48th annual cable car ringing contest. stay tuned for details.

mr. mcgovern: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, my friends on the other side of the aisle talk about the need to be fiscally responsible. i tried last night to or an -- offered an amendment in the rules committee that would say we should pay for the war in afghanistan. we should not continue to borrow the money. last year we borrowed $450 billion. that went on to the credit card. that leaves our kids and grandkids have to bear that burden. that amendment was not made in order. i couldn't offer that amendment. we talked last night about the give aways to big oil companies. and the need to get at those subsidies, we can't do it. we can't do it. it's not so open. i'd yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. andrews: we do believe that reducing the deficit is one way to instill confidence and create job

mr. speaker -- >> thank you, mr. speaker. i'm sure the whole house will wish to join me in paying tribute to the ranger of the fourth irish regiment who died wednesday and colin beckett from the parachute regiment who died thursday. they served with utmost dedication and pride. they will be hugely missed by their colleagues and by all who knew them. and our deepest sympathy should be with their family and their friends. mr. speaker, i had meetings with my ministerial colleagues. >> thank you, mr. speaker, i know the whole house will want to join with mr. prime minister with recent lost of life. and in my constituency, and the battle school have built up very good relationships between the community and the military, and they are ongoing and strengthening. mr. speaker, u.k. universities have a worldwide reputation for both teaching and research. many foreign students wish to attend those universities, and they're important because of the 5 billion pounds that they go to the national econom

mrs. emerson: i yield to mr. denham. mr. denham: i'd like to have a colloquy regarding the need to save taxpayer money by selling unneeded federal properties. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. denham: i originally planned on offering an amendment to cut the general services administration's budget to force it to sell unneeded federal properties. my purpose was to get g.s.a.'s attention and compel it to stop wasting billions of dollars on federal buildings we no longer need or barely use. however, through this colloquy i hope our committees can make a commitment to work together and accomplish this same goal. just last week i held my subcommittee's first hearing in a freezing cold, vacant federal building on pennsylvania avenue. it sits on one of the most famous streets in america. within walking distance of the u.s. capitol and the white house. yet it's been empty for over a decade and loses over $6 million in taxpayer money each year. i'm sad to say there are buildings like this across the entire nation. according

mr. king: mr. chairman. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from iowa rise? mr. king: i have an amendment at the desk, number 266. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 266 printed in the congressional record offered by mr. king of iowa. the chair: the gentlelady from connecticut. ms. delauro: i reserve a point of order. the chair: the gentlelady reserves a point of order. pursuant to the order of the house of february 17, 2011, the gentleman from iowa, mr. king, and a member opposed will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from iowa. mr. king: thank you, mr. chairman. amendment 266 is the amendment that has had a lot of discussion around this chamber and around this country and what it does is it recognizes the results of this c.r.s. report, mr. chairman. this report dated just last thursday, february 10, 2011. it took a long time to put all the numbers together in an official document that identified the money that are

mr. moran: mr. chairman, similar to the small business innovation research, this is actually one of the very -- most important things we can be doing within the defense budget. but not just for our military, not just for national security, but equally for our national economy. this is the line item that funded the internet. the whole concept of the internet came from dopa which is funded in this category of the defense budget. research and development, testing and evaluation. imagine what the internet has meant to the american economy, let alone the world. look what happened in egypt ultimately because of the internet. the g.p.s. system that we have in our vehicles, we take it for granted now, where did it come from? the rtd -- rdt&e account. this is what we want to cut out? the unmanned vehicles, the drones, the most effective war-fighting relationship weapon we have right now that doesn't put our soldiers' lives at risk, but is maximumally targeted are rdt&e, defense research, the energy research

mr. chair, i urge defeat of this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does gentlelady from florida rise? ms. wasserman schultz: move to strike the last word. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. wasserman schultz: i rise in support to add funding back to title 10. and i'm thrilled to join them in this important fight. . it's helped to reduce unintended pregnancies. the cut to the program would take away funding from essential women care providers like planned parenthood. today it serves over five million low-income people every year. women and men. they rely on them for life-saving cancer screenings, contraceptives and screening for sexually transmitted diseases. in 2009 alone title 1 providers provided over six million tests for sexually transmitted diseases including nearly a million h.i.v. tests. preventative care isn't limbed to cancer screenings and education on how to avoid s.t.d.'s. if r

mr. lazard to read the spirits of officer suguitan. >> on saturday generate 23, 2010 at 1721 hours, ms. johnson phoned the police to report that her roommate, mr. smith, was suffering from psychological problems, had been drinking, and was taking medication. in her request for the police, this johnson indicated mr. smith was not known to carry weapons and that she wanted vice from officers on how to deal with mr. smith. she needed assistance based on his behavior. officers brodericks suguitan and samuel fung arrived at the scene within four minutes. officer suguitan and fung were met by the woman outside of her porch. officer suguitan observed at the front door of the residence was open and stepped inside. officer suguitan noticed mr. smith and mr. rios, an additional roommate, were standing face to face having a conversation. both men were approximately 7 feet in front of officer suguitan. officer suguitan looked at both men and stated, how are you doing, we are here to help. mr. smith a

mr. nelson: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from nebraska. mr. nelson: mr. president, the amendment which senator schumer, akaka, shaheen, tester, yourself, the chair, whitehouse, menendez, senator nelson from florida and i have offered, which we'll be voting on shortly is a commonsense approach to protecting the interests of an individual's privacy when they pass through security check points at airports and public buildings. nebraskans and americans understand that every step must be taken to keep federal buildings and air travel safe in america, particularly after the 9/11 attacks. however, as we promote security, safeguards are necessary to protect everybody's privacy from misuse of images generate bid body scanning machines. our legislation sends a commonsense message: we won't ignore people's privacy as we make sure air travel and federal buildings are saefplt the amendment is very -- are safe. the amendment is straightforward. it would, number one, make it a crime to photogra

mr. gerlock is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. secretary, thank you for testifying today. one of the statements the president made in the state of the union which i felt was very positive was his desire to address the corporate tax situation and while he did not express necessarily where he felt the rate should be lowered to. it was a very positive statement that's an initial he wants to work on. do you have a sense of where the president wants to go from the 35% corporate to what level? >> well, my own view is for it to be worth it, you got to move it substantially lower. the average right now -- >> 30s or below 30 into the 20s? >> the average rate of our major trading partners now is in the high 20s. and you -- to make a meaningful difference you want to get it down substantially towards that level. >> okay. and are you of the belief by doing that you're incentivizing more domestic activity, economic activity, try to encourage more investment here domestically rather than abroad? >> absolutely. there's two very important rationa

mr. markey: mr. speaker, i yield myself one minute. and i do so just to say that democrats see high unemployment and we look forward, we recognize that american ingenuity, innovation and hard work can dig us out of this hole by creating high-paying, long-term domestic jobs in new, vibrant industries. the republican majority, they see high unemployment and they look backwards. they seek to increase the already massive profits with huge international corporations and hope that on their way to the bank they hire a few people here and there. ladies and gentlemen, the great challenge of our time is to not allow china and germany to replace opec as the place from which we have to import our energy technologies. if there is no plan, which is forth coming from the republican majority, which so far has not presented itself because they have yet to have one bill that actually creates one job come here onto the house floor in the first five weeks that they have controlled the majority, then i am afraid that the

mr. reid: mr. president? the presiding officer: the majority leader. mr. reid: i ask unanimous consent that we now proceed to a period of morning business with senators allowed to speak for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, that when the cincinnati completes its -- senate completes its business today, it adjourn until 4:00 p.m. on thursday, february 10. following the prayer and the pledge, the journal of proceedings be approved to date, the morning hour be deemed expired, the time twor the two leaders be reserved for their use later any day, following any leader remarks, the senate proceed to a period of morning business with senators permitted to speak for up to ten minutes each. the presiding officer: without objection. mr. reid: mr. president, there will be no roll call votes during thursday's session of the senate. we hope to clear the trade assistance adjustment legislation on thursday. senators should expect the next roll call votes to

mr. inhofe: mr. president, there's been some confusion moving around of time, so while i was supposed to be earlier, let me just ask unanimous consent that i be allowed to speak as if in morning business for such time as i would consume. the presiding officer: without t objection, so ordered. mr. inhofe: i would say to my friend from arkansas, who just spoke, that i know a little bit about the program you have. in fact, you're fully aware -- the senator is fully aware that my daughter molly is a marketing professor at the university of arkansas, who has talked about this very concept. i don't know what -- why all of the successes have gravitated to northwest arkansas but it seems like they have. maybe this has something to do with it. but i'll look forward to following through with you on these such -- this program. mr. president, i was -- i want to mention a couple of things that i -- i've been wanting to talk about but i'm here actually to describe two amendments that i have to the f.a.a. bill. the

mr. nuÑes is recognized. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr.kirk, welcome to the committee. >> thank you. >> hear virtually earn on this side of the aisle ask you about specifics as it relates to colombia and panama. and we still haven't heard any specifics. mr., the ranking member, mr. levin, mentioned that these specifics do exist although we still don't know what they are. we have, i did hear you specifically say you mentioned something when mr. johnson was questioning you, you mentioned the communities of pittsburgh, detroit and the carolinas as not benefiting from trade, so i thought that was getting close to specifics, and i just wondered how do those communities not benefit from the colombian or panama trade agreements? >> well, first of all, if i said that, i misspoke myself. i think all americans been fit from trade because, first of all, every family fits when -- pen fits when we make it easier and cheaper to put food on the table, when we make it easier to provide the most advanced electronics to help kids with their education. but t

mr. king: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. chairman, i thank the chairman of the subcommittee of appropriations on h.h.s., congressman rehberg, for yielding. and want to declare my support for this amendment and i think he's happy if i refer to it as the rehberg amendment. i want to also thank danny rehberg for the work he's done on this. america will never know, mr. chairman, how much work went into crafting this amendment, to get this fix that does a little bit to take us down the road and, boy, it is important to me to see $100 million cut out of the resources that would be used to implement obamacare. and, mr. chairman, i'm also very confident in declaring it to be obamacare. i listen to president obama address it as obamacare on february 25 of last year at the blair house during the health care summit. i thought that was the source of the moniker, obamacare, was the president himself. and if anyone, you know, thinks otherwise, i think they should look back and check the record. obamacare is this, it's not $1 trillion in d