mr. bartlett, for 60 minutes. mr. bartlett: thank you very much. madam speaker, i have come to this floor nearly 50 times to talk about an energy subject. the last time that i was here in the well addressing this subject was about two years ago. during those nearly 50 appearances i came here as a prophet and now i return to the floor as an historian. because the event that i was concerned about and predicting has in fact occurred. let me explain. in the middle of the last century, two speeches were given by men just about a year apart. i'm not sure they even knew each other. they both talked about the same subject. the first of those speeches was given in 1956. it was, i think, the most important speech of the last century. it was given by an oil geologist to a group of oil men in san antonio, texas, in 1956. at that time the united states was king of oil. we produced more oil, we exported more oil, we used more oil than any other nation in the world. m. king hub bard predicted to that audience that in just 14 years the united states would reach it

mr. bartlett is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. bartlett: thank you, madam speaker. let me first note the press clippings today that caught my eye, kind of signs of the time. one of them talks about a -- a 1,900 page omnibus appropriations bill that's being prepared. you know there will be no one person in the country that has read all of that bill. and i think the mirn people -- the american people are not supportive of bringing these huge bills to the floor that nobody has had a chance to read. but that wasn't what caught my eye so much as the subheading earmarkers feast on pork one last time before diet. then in brackets it said it includes the joint strike fighter second engine. i'd like to make a couple of comments on earmarks. i know that they are symbolic of frivolous, wasteful, out of control spending in congress. even though the total amount of money in earmarks is pretty small, they still are symbolically a very big and important issue. i can live without earmarks. i had earmarks, i published them all on my website. none o

mr. bartlett wrote: "what are the odds that republicans will ever allow" -- ever allow -- "this one-year tax holiday to expire? they wrote the bush tax cuts with explicit expiration dates and then when it came time" -- right now -- "for the law they wrote to take effect exactly as they wrote it, they said any failure to extend them permanently would constitute the biggest tax increase in history. if allowing the bush tax cuts to expire is the biggest tax cut in history, one that republicans claim would decimate a still fragile economy, then surely expiration of a payroll tax holiday would also constitute a massive tax increase on the working people of america. republicans" -- this is brute bartlett who i'm -- bruce bartlett who i'm quoting, a former advisor to president reagan and the first president bush -- "republicans who would wish to destroy social security's finances or permanently fund it with general revenues switch the revenue base from the payroll tax to general revenues than allow a once suspended payroll tax to be imposed. arch social security hater peter ferraro once told me

mr. bartlett: for four years i was the chair of the subcommittee. leadership in the congress changed and for two years i was his ranking member and he was my chair. and then sadly our term limits on the republican side of the house i had to leave that subcommittee, but never left my strong interest in that subcommittee. i will tell you there is no person in the congress who has been more committed or more effective in making sure we have the right kind of navy, the right size navy. when i first came here i looked up gene taylor because we shared some social things. as a democrat he kind of shown out different than other democrats. he says we are joined at the hip. we are. your departure is a grave loss to this congress and to our nation. i've been honored to serve with you, sir. thank you and i yield back. mr. akin: thank you for those most appropriate comments, roscoe. the second gentleman i think we need to recognize is undersecretary stackley has really helped tremendously with his level of detailed knowledge about how you work these contracts an

mr. bartlett, the ranking member on the airland subcommiee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mr. barton: thank you for yieldi. when i -- mr. bartlett: thank yofor yielding. when i camto the congress 18 years ago i was assigned to the armed services committee. the subcommittees are determined by seniority and member preferences. we all get together in the room and we select our committees and as the more popular committees are filled, less and less opportunities are available to junior members. for reasons that i'm not sure, i fully understand the personnel subcommittee's the last to fill up. and since i was the lowest ranking person on the republican side, i ended up on the personnel subcommittee. ike skelton was then senior enough on the democrat side that he chaired that personnel subcommittee, and those were tough times for the military. we really didn't hav enough money. and i remember that ike was really stressed. he was stressed to the point that he was actually emotional that we didn't h

mr. bartlett, the ranking member on the air land subcommittee on the armed services committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. bartlett: one might wonder at our priorities, for the first time in many, many years we don't have time to pass the defense authorization bill but we do have time to pull out a very controversial part of that, whose passage no one would argue would be particularly helpful, it just won't be too hurtful. maybe that's why our favorable ratings are somewhere between used car salesmen and embezzlers. there's an old adage that says he who frames the question gets the answer. 15% to 20% of marines said it would be a good idea, you can't take the 50% of people that said it wouldn't have an impact and say that means it's a good idea. no matter what my sexual orientation was, i couldn't be supportive of this. three of the joint chiefs said this would be disruptive. there are a lot of prejudices out there. i might regret the prejudices but i didn't change the fact that they're out there. this is not conducive to good order

mr. bartlett, the ranking member on the airland subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mr. barton: thank you for yielding. when i -- mr. bartlett: thank you for yielding. when i came to the congress 18 years ago i was assigned to the armed services committee. the subcommittees are determined by seniority and member preferences. we all get together in the room and we select our committees and as the more popular committees are filled, less and less opportunities are available to junior members. for reasons that i'm not sure, i fully understand the personnel subcommittee's the last to fill up. and since i was the lowest ranking person on the republican side, i ended up on the personnel subcommittee. ike skelton was then senior enough on the democrat side that he chaired that personnel subcommittee, and those were tough times for the military. we really didn't have enough money. and i remember that ike was really stressed. he was stressed to the point that he was actually emotional that we d

mr. bartlett, the ranking member on the air land subcommittee on the armed services committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. bartlett: one might wonder at our priorities, for the first time in many, many years we don't have time to pass the defense authorization bill but we do have time to pull out a very controversial part of that, whose passage no one would argu would be particularly helpful, it just won't be too hurtful. maybe that's why our favorable ratings are somewhere between used car salesmen and embezzlers. there's an old adage that says he who frames the question gets the answer. 15% to 20% of marines said it would be a good idea, you can't take the 50% of people that said it wouldn't have an impact and say that means it's a good idea. no matter what my sexual orientation was, i couldn't be supportive of this. three of the joint chiefs said this would be disruptive. there are a lot of prejudices out there. i might regret the prejudices but i didn't change the fact that they're out there. this is not conducive to good order

mr. bartlett wrote: "what are the odds that republicans will ever allow" -- ever allow -- "this one-year tax holiday to expire? they wrote the bush tax cuts with explicit expiration dates and then when it came time" -- right now -- "for the law they wrote to take effect exactly as they wrote it, they said any failure to extend them permanently would constitute the biggest tax increase in history. if allowing the bush tax cuts to expire is the biggest tax cut in history, one that republicans claim would decimate a still fragile economy, then surely expiration of a payroll tax holiday would also constitute a massive tax increase on the working people of america. republicans" -- this is brute bartlett who i'm -- bruce bartlett who i'm quoting, a former advisor to president reagan and the first president bush -- "republicans who would wish to destroy social security's finances or permanently fund it with general revenues switch the revenue base from the payroll tax to general revenues than allow a once suspended payroll tax to be imposed. arch social security hater peter ferraro once told me

mr. bartlett, the ranking member on the airland subcommittee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for two minutes. mr. barton: thank you for yielding. when i -- mr. bartlett: thank you for yielding. when i came to the congress 18 years ago i was assigned to the armed services committee. the subcommittees are determined by seniority and member preferences. we all get together in the room and we select our committees and as the more popular committees are filled, less and less opportunities are available to junior members. for reasons that i'm not sure, i fully understand the personnel subcommittee's the last to fill up. and since i was the lowest ranking person on the republican side, i ended up on the personnel subcommittee. ike skelton was then senior enough on the democrat side that he chaired that personnel subcommittee, and those were tough times for the military. we really didn't have enough money. and i remember that ike was really stressed. he was stressed to the point that he was actually emotional that we d

mr. bartlett: i move that we now adjourn. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the motion to adjourn. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the motion is agreed to. accordingly the house is adjourned until 4:00 >> the u.s. house of representatives censured congressman charles rangel today for financial misconduct. over the next hour and a half, you will see that floor debate and hear from mr. rangel both on the floor and in a meeting with reporters. we will also open our phone lines for your reaction. after that, a senate armed services committee hearing on possible repeal of the "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding gays serving in the military. defense secretary robert gates is encouraging congress to repeal the policy. >> if i had to put my money on a likely outcome, it would be that peace in iraq, and it might be a very harsh peace, it is likely ultimately to be imposed once again. we just have to hope that if that does happen, the new ruler, the new dictator, will be a lot more benign tha

mr. bartlett is saying is what we all know to be true. if you provide a tax break for one year, in this case, a payroll tax holiday, a year from now if you restore the old rates, 6.2%, our republicans are going to say democrats are raising your taxes. it ain't going to happen. this one year extension could well become a permanent extension, and if it becomes a permanent extension, you are diverting a huge amount of money to social security, and you are weakening the entire financial structure of social security in this country which i except is exactly what some would like to do. now, president obama says, well, not to worry. it's just one year, and don't worry, that one year is covered by the federal government, so for the very first time out of the treasury department, # money is coming into the social security which has always been 100% dependent on payroll taxes as it should be. for the first time we are breaking that. around here, if you do that once, it will continue. what the president of the national committee to preserve social s

and i want to read you an interesting quote from a gentleman named bruce bartlett. mr. bart slate former top advisor for president george h.w. bush. this is what he wrote in opposition to this payroll tax cut. that is guy who was an advisor to president reagan and the first president bush. this is what he said. he said -- quote -- "what are the odds that republicans will ever allow this one-year tax holiday to expire? they wrote the bush tax cuts with explicit expiration dates and then when it came time for the law they wrote to take effect exactly as they wrote it, they said any failure to extend them permanently would constitute the biggest tax increase in history." end of quote for a moment. so what mr. bartlett is saying -- and i'm going to go back to his quote in a second -- what he's saying is we all know to be true, that around here in congress, if you provide a tax break for one year -- in this case, a payroll tax holiday -- a year from now, if you restore the old rates, which are 6.2%, our republican friends are going to say, democrats are raising your taxes. i

mr. bartlett said -- "we knew that politically once you get it, the tax cuts, into law, it becomes almost impossible to remove it. that's not a bad legacy. the fact that we were able to lay the trap does feel pretty good, to tell you the truth." end of quote. my republican friends know it. in two years, you will be back to extend it, and that's what we're voting on. let's be clear about it. mr. president, if, in fact, that we don't know what the future brings us, but if, in fact, we do end up extending the tax breaks for the next ten years, as our republican colleagues wanted, it will increase the national debt by $700 billion and would give a tax cut of over over $100,000 to a year to year to people earning more than than $1 million. it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. mr. president, we should also be clear that this agreement between the president and the republican leadership also, also continues the bush era of 15% tax rate on capital gains and dividends, meaning that those people who make their living off of their investments will continue to pay a substantially lower tax rat

mr. friend bartlett, put it well when he said 100 years from now, we want the world to say they changed the safety regime and offshore drilling. these are a worthy aspiration with one significant exception. the world should see this in 2011, not in 2010. as a nation, we have the opportunity to exchange, to have a chance to learn the lessons from this disaster in a way that our oil and gas industry is stronger, our work is safer, our environment is healthier and our national security more secure finally, i would like to know why injury impressed with what we have been able to accomplish without subpoena power. i remain mystified as to why a few senators decided to do by this commission this power when subpoena power has been granted as almost an absolute for congressional commissions with chaff analogous responsibilities to hours. when the subpoena power has the lack of subpoena power has made our commission's work more difficult. our success is a testament both to the determination and skill of our team and the plain fact the problems and deficiencies of the current safety regime are so egr

mr. fred bartlett, put it well when he said, 100 years from now, we want the world to say they changed the safety regime in offshore drilling. these were the words with the aspiration with one significant exception. the world should say this in 2011, not in 2110. as a nation, we have the opportunity to make this change. we have a chance to learn the lessons from this disaster in a way that our oil and gas industry is stronger, our workers safer, our environment healthier, and our national security more secure. finally, i would like to note that i am very impressed with what we've been able to accomplish without subpoena power. i remain mist fied as -- mystified why a few senators decided to deny the commission this power when subpoena power has been granted as almost an absolute for congressional commissions which have responsibilities to ours. when subpoena power has -- the lack of s&p power has -- subpoena power has made our commission's work more difficult. our success is a testament both to the determination and skill of our team and to the plain fact that the problems and dirt sighs w