ms. woolsey: thank you. i'd like to thank chairman klein, ranking member walberg, i mean chairman walberg, ranking member miller, and -- for their work on this legislation. it has been truly a gift to work in a bipartisan manner. thank you, mr. walberg. the speaker pro tempore: does the gentlewoman yield back the balance of her time? ms. woolsey: i ask unanimous consent at this time that all members have five legislative days to insert extraneous materials. i believe we have members of our -- the speaker pro tempore: without objection. does the gentlewoman wish to reserve the balance of her time? ms. woolsey: i will reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. >> thank you, mr. speaker. i ask for unanimous consent to submit for the record a manager's joint statement of legislative intent. this statement reflects the views of chairman klein, mr. miller, ms. woolsey, and myself, regarding key aspects of the bill. the speaker pro t

ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, i rise in support of h.r. 2465, the federal workers compensation modernization and improvement act. this legislation is a product of bipartisan cooperation and consensus and i thank the chairman of the work force protection committee for being here and being the leader on this today. this legislation updates and improves the federal employees' compensation act or feca, which provides legislation to ensure they can continue to support their families and pay their bills if they're injured on the job. a core principle embedded in the law is that workers should be no better off or no worse off for having suffered a work-related injury. the reforms in this bill are an initial step toward making feca fairer and more efficient for taxpayers and federal employees who depend on the program. h.r. 2465 updates benefits for funeral expenses and facial disfigurements beth of which have not been updated since 1949. it ensures that acts of terror are covered to include advance practice nurs

ms. woolsey: earlier economist bruce bartlett, who served in the reagan and bush administrations, had this to say about an earlier republican balanced budget amendment. he said, and i quote him, it looks like it was drafted by a couple of interns on the back of a napkin. grant it, he was talking about a different version, but i still say that was pretty unfair to interns who i think could do a lot better than this amendment that we're debating today. if the balanced budget were in place today it would cripple the economy and decimate social security, medicare, veterans' programs, among many others. the austerity dogma of the republican majority, their balanced budget fetish is hurting america, not helping it. we need more federal dollars pumped into this economy. we need it to stimulate demand and to create jobs. we don't need less. if you get caught in a rainstorm, i mean, i wouldn't want to be caught in the rainstorm with the other -- anybody on the other side of the aisle because i'd be afraid that they'd propose a constitutional amendment banning umbrellas. called me old-fashioned, mr.

ms. woolsey, for five minutes. ms. woolsey: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, a few weeks ago, i spoke on this -- in this chamber about the u.n. report that outlined the grew ma details of prisoner abuse at detention facilities in afghanistan. inmates beaten with electric wires, hung from their wrists and much worse. now additional report big "the washington post" has revealed that u.s. officials knew for some time about this torture of prisoners by after gap security forces. and what did our top people in afghanistan do about these warnings? apparently, not a thing. for years, our special operations forces and c.i.a. officials had been in and out of these prisons, dropping off detainees, meeting with afghan authorities, taking advantage of the intelligence gathered there. we paid to rebuild one prison with a cold and chilling name, department 124. department 124. that sits behind a concrete fortress near u.s. military headquarters in kabul. it would be hard, actually it would be impossible to miss what was going on inside those walls. but for a long t

ms. woolsey, for five minutes. ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, sometimes it seems like the surest way to get in the most trouble is to tell the truth about the war in afghanistan. witness the case of major general peter fuller who congressman walter jones just talked about. general fuller was one of our troop commanders in afghanistan until he decided to speak his mind. after president karzai made the outrageous statement that he would backpack stand in a war against the united states, major general fuller delivered a colorful, can dade, on the record reply, he said why don't you just poke me in the eye with a needle? he said of president karzai, whom he also described as erratic and isolated from reality. he added that the afghan government doesn't properly appreciate the enormous sacrifices americans are making on afghanistan's behalf. especially at a time when we have major economic challenges right here at home. and what was major general fuller's award for telling it like it is? what did he get for expressing the frustration so many

ms. woolsey, for five minutes. ms. woolsey: thank you, mr. speaker. every one of us in this congress believes that keeping the nation safe as well as providing benefits to our veterans as promised is our very top priority. it's a very, however, of just how do we do that? and a decade of war and military occupation is not the best way. whenever spending cuts are on the agenda, as they are right now, with the supercommittee, racing to meet its deadline, military and defense programs continue to get a pass. why should the png penning get a blank -- pentagon get a blank check while safety net programs have to look for change in the couch cushions to keep their programs going? it's time for the pentagon to share in the sacrifice. especially since it's been so generously funded over the years. a 50% increase in the d.o.d. budget over the last decade. digger in real dollars today -- bigger in real dollars today than it was at the height of the cold war. in the war in afghanistan would save at least $10 billion a month. actually it's more like 12 now. to say

ms. woolsey, for five minutes. ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, over the weekend nato air strikes killed at least 24 pakistani soldiers in a tragic friendly fire i.n.s. pent that has once again elevated tensions between the -- incident that has once again elevated tensions between the u.s. and pakistan. regardless who is at fault whether our sources were acting in self-defense or had legitimate reason to believe they were firing on insurgents, the pakistan government is furious and the bilateral relationshipple is facing a grave crisis. pakistan said they are cutting off supply routes into afghanistan. they have said they will no longer participate in a critically important international conference in germany next week. a conference that will help chart afghan's future. and this episode is fanning flames of anti-american sentiment in a country whose people are already hostile. in the last few days we have seen public demonstrations of pakistanis burning the u.s. flag and shouting, whoever is a friend of america is a traitor of the land. c

ms. woolsey, the the ranking subcommittee member of the committee. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. ms. woolsey: h.r. 3094, the so-called work force democracy and fairness act, what a great title for legislation that assaults the majority's year-long war against unions, against workers and the national labor relations board. this is just the latest of that, and they gave it this wonderful title. since they took control of this body in january, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have been doing everything in their power to stack the deck begins labor unions and those who aspire to join them. seemingly, the bills they bring to the floor are designed to make life easier for the corporate special interests and, as usual, hard-earned workers who just want a fair shake. curious, since the labor movement is the most powerful force for economic security and upper mobility that we have in this country and unions are the reason there is a strong middle class in the united states of america that they would want to attack it. we

ms. woolsey: mr. speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlelady is recognized. ms. woolsey: november -- ms. richardson: all across america, americans need help. they need help to stand, to sit, to put on their shoes, to go to the restroom and even some to take their last breath. while there are those who are sitting by the bed side of those people, we call them in-home health care workers who oftentimes in this country barely make even a minimum wage themselves and if they needed the very care they were providing, they could probably not afford it. as this congress decides and looks at the joint committee's decisions and proposals before us, let's not go against those working people, thousands of people who don't even have enough to take care of their own families. the decisions can be done better, but they certainly should not be on the backs of working people and those who care for our amer

ms. woolsey: earlier economist bruce bartlett, who served in the reagan and bush administrations, had this to say about an earlier republican balanced budget amendment. he said, and i quote him, it looks like it was drafted by a couple of interns on the back of a napkin. grant it, he was talking about a different version, but i still say that was pretty unfair to interns who i think could do a lot better than this amendment that we're debating today. if the balanced budget were in place today it would cripple the economy and decimate social security, medicare, veterans' programs, among many others. the austerity dogma of the republican majority, their balanced budget fetish is hurting america, not helping it. we need more federal dollars pumped into this economy. we need it to stimulate demand and to create jobs. we don't need less. if you get caught in a rainstorm, i mean, i wouldn't want to be caught in the rainstorm with the other -- anybody on the other side of the aisle because i'd be afraid that they'd propose a constitutional amendment banning umbrellas. called me old-fashioned, mr.