[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 83 (Monday, May 21, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H5525-H5528]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  HONORING JORDAN CARLSON AND THOR-LO

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hill). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 18, 2007, the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. 
Foxx) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority 
leader.
  Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commend THOR-LO, Incorporated, 
of Statesville, North Carolina, for its commitment to fighting breast 
cancer. This company, which makes specialized socks for almost any 
activity, has pledged $250,000 as a national sponsor for the Breast 
Cancer 3-Day campaign.
  The campaign will raise funds through a dozen 3-day 60-mile walks in 
cities across the Nation and will support the Susan G. Komen for the 
Cure foundation. But the story doesn't stop there.
  THOR-LO first became involved in this effort through the example and 
spirit of a young woman in Mocksville, North Carolina. Jordan Carlson 
is the

[[Page H5526]]

daughter of Jan Carlson, a woman who has twice fought off breast 
cancer. Jordan has the ambitious goal of participating in all 12 of the 
60-mile walks. By walking more than 700 miles, Jordan plans to raise $1 
million to help fight breast cancer.
  It was her request for walking socks that brought THOR-LO into the 
picture last year. THOR-LO has not only committed $250,000 to the 3-day 
campaign, the company has also designed a sock especially for the 
thousands of 3-day walkers. They call it the HERO Everyday Walker and 
are donating one additional dollar for every new sock that they sell. 
The special HERO sock is almost entirely pink and sports a pink breast 
cancer ribbon to commemorate the cause for which 3-day walkers will be 
raising money.
  THOR-LO employees designed the new sock after going on a trial walk 
with Jordan last year. The sock is specifically designed for the form 
of the female foot and is made to withstand the tough conditions of 3 
days of almost nonstop walking.
  The partnership of THOR-LO with Jordan Carlson is a triumph of the 
spirit of American compassion and generosity. Jordan's example has 
inspired THOR-LO to support a great philanthropic cause and to offer 
not only generous financial support, but to bring THOR-LO's sock making 
know-how to the thousands of walkers who will raise millions to find a 
cure for breast cancer.
  It is my hope that Jordan's story and partnership with THOR-LO will 
serve to inspire her family, friends and classmates and everyone who 
hears about it to follow in her footsteps.
  I commend her and all those at THOR-LO, especially the employees who 
worked to design and produce these special socks. How fortunate for us 
to live in a country where people care so much.
  Jordan has discovered one of the secrets of a life well-lived: 
selfless devotion to a cause larger than herself. I believe that this 
young woman's passion to help find a cure will lead her to inspire 
countless Americans to grasp the great American ideals of generosity 
and hard work in the service of noble causes.


           Broken Promises on Earmark Reform and Ethics Rules

  Now, Mr. Speaker, I am switching subjects, and I'm very sad for the 
occasion to have to do that. I much prefer to talk on this floor about 
the great things that American people are doing and hold them up as 
examples for others, but unfortunately, tonight, I need to talk about a 
very sad situation that has occurred in the House of Representatives.
  Today, Representative Mike Rogers offered a privileged resolution to 
force the full House to vote on whether to reprimand senior Democrat 
John Murtha, Democrat from Pennsylvania, for threatening Rogers on the 
House floor last week. The actions by Representative Murtha constitute 
a violation of House rules which preclude Members from conditioning 
earmarks on another's vote.
  Curiously, Speaker Nancy Pelosi chose to defend Murtha yesterday even 
though, according to the Associated Press, Representative Murtha did 
not deny that he violated House rules.
  Congress Daily PM reports that Democratic leadership aides, ``want to 
make this go away as soon as possible,'' but Representative Murtha's 
violation is part of a growing pattern of abuses that show the House 
has moved away from earmark reform under Democrats, rather than toward 
it. Today Republican Leader John Boehner sent a letter to Speaker 
Pelosi to renew his long-standing request for a bipartisan working 
group tasked with recommending fair, sensible and understandable House 
ethics rules. A little bit later in my comments, I'm going to read that 
letter and insert it into the Record.
  As has been reported previously, this is the second incident where 
Representative Murtha has threatened a GOP Member who dared challenge 
his questionable earmark, which has been deemed, ``an expensive and 
duplicative use of scarce Federal drug enforcement resources,'' 
according to the May 8 edition of The Hill. Fox News has also 
previously reported on his threat to Representative Todd Tiahrt from 
Kansas, including the video of it on the House floor.
  House Democrats have repeatedly promised the most open and ethical 
Congress in history. It's so ironic that during a week when Democrats 
will bring up their lobbying and ethics reform bill, which we hear has 
been watered down considerably, will they back Representative Murtha 
and make a mockery of their own rules, or will they keep their pledge 
to the American people?
  And let me remind everyone what some of those pledges were. I want to 
contrast some of the promises from the top two Democratic leaders with 
how they are running things today: violations of earmark disclosure 
rules, no debate, no amendments to strike, no transparency, no 
scrutiny, no sunlight. The American people are beginning to catch on to 
the Democrats' sham pledges and broken promises.
  First, let me quote from the Majority Leader, Representative Steny 
Hoyer, Democrat from Maryland. ``We are going to adopt rules that make 
the system of legislation transparent so that we don't legislate in the 
dark of night, and the public and other Members can see what is being 
done.''

  Second quote. ``We need to have [earmarks] subject to [more] debate. 
That's what debate and public awareness is all about. Democracy works 
if people know what's going on.''
  And this has appeared in www.tpmcafe.com, and I'm going again to make 
this available so that anyone who wants to go to check that quote can 
go to it without accepting what I'm saying for it.
  Then Speaker Pelosi, the number one Democrat in the House, ``There 
has to be transparency,'' on earmarks. That's in www.usatoday.com.
 Here's a question that was asked of her. ``Yes. They're saying that 
you would need to put the earmark into a text of a bill instead of in a 
conference report so that they can--''
  And Representative Pelosi answers, ``Well, I think, first of all--
anything that is in any bill, any provision, whether it's an earmark or 
not, should be--there should be transparency, so that--that's why we 
have said--and I hope you would agree--that before Members vote on the 
bill, there should be an appropriate time for people to be able to read 
it, that it be a matter of public record. And if there's an earmark 
that can stand the scrutiny, then that transparency will give the 
opportunity for it to be there.
  ``There are many earmarks that are very worthy--all of mine, as a 
matter of fact--'' and remember, I'm quoting Speaker Pelosi, ``but it 
is--because we're talking about helping people in the community--it's 
the special interest earmarks that are the ones that go in there in the 
dark of night, that they don't want anybody to see, and that nobody 
does see and that are voted upon.
  ``So transparency--yes, by all means, let's subject them all to the 
scrutiny that they deserve and let them compete for the dollar. But 
myself, I would not be unhappy.'' And this was in her weekly press 
conference, 3/17/06.
  Now, the earmark that is under question is an earmark that was in the 
Intelligence bill last week. There were many, many efforts to bring 
that out, all of them thwarted by the Democratic leadership.
  Now, here is Congressman Boehner's letter to Speaker Pelosi. I don't 
have the exact text. I'm going to read what it said. But the process 
``has become less transparent and less accountable than it was during 
the 109th Congress, directly violating pledges made last year by 
Democratic leaders.'' Boehner's letter comes as the House prepares to 
consider a privileged resolution offered by Representative Mike Rogers 
concerning an earmark-related House rules violation by Representative 
John Murtha, Democrat of Pennsylvania, who was the Speaker's preferred 
choice for House majority leader.
  Boehner's letter lists a series of rules abuses by the Democratic 
majority he argues have made a mockery of House rules that are supposed 
to ensure that no taxpayer-funded earmark is passed without appropriate 
scrutiny and debate.
  In addition to the Murtha incidents, Boehner notes Democrats have 
refused to allow Members to challenge questionable earmarks on the 
House floor,

[[Page H5527]]

certified a huge spending bill as earmark free though it contained 
hundreds of millions of dollars in earmarks, and preserved special 
privileges for State and local government lobbyists seeking earmarks 
from Congress, including lobbyists for public universities.
  Boehner says in the letter, ``At the outset of this Congress, 
Republicans and Democrats jointly pledged to make the earmark process 
more transparent and more accountable to the American people. A rules 
package was adopted that was supposed to enforce this pledge as one of 
its central objectives by ensuring no earmark would be passed by the 
House without appropriate scrutiny and opportunity for debate. Recent 
actions by the majority have begun to make a mockery of this vow and of 
the rules themselves.''

                              {time}  2100

  I go on quoting from the letter.
  ``These actions by the majority have become increasingly flagrant and 
bold with each passing month of the 110th Congress, fueling public 
cynicism about our institution and disheartening many who believe 
fundamental change is needed in the way in which Washington spends the 
taxpayers' money.''
  Boehner goes on to say, in the letter, ``We have now reached the 
point at which the congressional earmark process has become less 
transparent and less accountable than it was during the 109th Congress, 
directly violating pledges made last year by Democratic leaders.''
  What this is about is an action by Representative Murtha to secure 
tens of millions of dollars for a questionable project in his district 
by highly suspect methods that either flaunted the new rules without 
penalty, or, at best, nominally complied with them, proving in either 
case how utterly ineffective the new rules really are.
  Again, in February, the majority was able to certify a massive 
spending bill as earmark-free, despite the fact that it contained 
hundreds of millions of dollars in earmarks. Under the rules, there is 
no way a Member can challenge an earmark that is included in a bill 
brought to the House floor as long as the bill contains a list of 
earmarks, even if the list is inaccurate and fails to include the 
earmark the Member seeks to challenge. This is a terrible way to get 
around the situation and continued to fund questionable projects, which 
Members of the majority want to fund, and they are very disingenuous in 
this process.
  But perhaps most appalling, the majority has twisted House rules and 
procedure to prevent questionable earmarks, once identified, from being 
challenged in any way on the House floor by Members seeking nothing 
more than up-or-down votes on these suspect provisions. In fact, on at 
least two occasions, Republican Members objecting to illegitimate 
earmarks have been directly threatened with retaliation by a senior 
Democratic Member in open defiance of the new rules.
  I would like also to read a piece which Congressman Mike Rogers has 
written, and it's called ``The Sopranos on Capitol Hill?''
  ``Bridges to nowhere, the $100 hammer. A rainforest in Iowa. Billions 
of taxpayer dollars unaccounted for.
  ``It's no wonder the American people are disgusted with the way 
Congress spends their money. In the latest incident certain to cement 
the public's frustration, a powerful chairman threatened and attempted 
to intimidate me when I tried to stop wasteful duplicative spending 
from what the U.S. News and World Report has called a taxpayer 
`boondoggle.' Even more troubling, this pork-barrel project takes 
precious intelligence resources from spies on the ground catching 
terrorists in places like Fallujah, Iraq, and sends it to bureaucrats 
in Johnstown, Pennsylvania.
  ``Two weeks ago I offered a proposal to the Fiscal Year 2008 
Intelligence Authorization Act that would have taken funding away from 
an illegitimate, wasteful earmark that happened to be in the district 
of House Defense Appropriations chairman John Murtha, Democrat, 
Pennsylvania. Chairman Murtha's earmark would authorize tens of 
millions for the National Drug Intelligence Center, NDIC, a government 
office that the House Government Reform Committee has deemed an 
`expensive and duplicative use of scarce Federal drug resources,' 
according to an article in the May 8 edition of The Hill.
  ``Last week, on the House floor, Chairman Murtha violated House rules 
in an expletive-laced tirade, pointing his finger and threatening my 
priorities `now and forever.' Just last week, Chairman Murtha 
`exploded' and `unleashed a loud, finger-jabbing, spittle-spraying 
piece of his mind' at a colleague on his committee, according to The 
Hill. Chairman Murtha then `. . . threatened to withdraw support from a 
defense project . . .' vital to his colleague's district, according to 
the article. This week he attempted to intimidate me, and when I had 
the audacity to question the merits of the project, his reaction was 
more finger pointing and intimidation.
  ``Today I will introduce a resolution outlining this egregious action 
which is not only beneath the dignity of Congress, it constitutes a 
violation of House rules, which preclude Members from conditioning 
spending in other districts on another Member's vote. The House should 
reprimand Chairman Murtha for his conduct.
  ``This incident in the people's House highlighted arrogance of power 
at its worst, and both political parties are guilty. This is why the 
American people throw up their hands and are fed up with Washington 
politicians. If we are ever going to restore the trust of the American 
people, Congress can and must do better.
  ``This reminds me how far some in Congress have gotten away from 
America's founding. When General George Washington led a rag-tag group 
of Americans to defeat the most powerful military in the world, many in 
this new land wanted him to be King. Many feared without a strong, all-
powerful leader, our new Nation would be vulnerable to attack. A 
beautiful painting hangs in the Rotunda of the U.S. Capitol Building 
highlighting Washington's next action, which was perhaps unprecedented 
in all of history. George Washington voluntarily resigned his 
commission as head of the Revolutionary Army, giving up personal gain 
for the greater good of the new Nation. Too many in Washington, D.C., 
of both parties have instead taken from the greater good for their own 
gain.
  ``The House floor is not the place for an episode of `The Sopranos,' 
and protecting the public's tax dollars is a basic duty of all Members 
of Congress. The good news is this could be an opportunity for 
Republicans and Democrats to change the way Congress does business and 
to change the way taxpayer money is spent. The country and our 
citizens' pocketbooks would be better off for it.''
  That ends the article by Congressman Mike Rogers, a Republican from 
Michigan, and a former FBI Special Agent.
  As has been said and alluded to by the comments that I have read here 
tonight, this is simply the latest but most egregious situation where 
the Imajority party is doing exactly the opposite of what it promised 
to do.
  It promised many times on this floor last year, many times in 
campaigns, the most ethical Congress ever. That simply has not been the 
case.
  We have people up here every day saying things that are not true. 
They keep saying they are not raising taxes in the budget. We know they 
are. Even some of their Members have said it. Some of their Members 
voted with the Republicans against the budget, and at least one of them 
said, I simply cannot vote to let these tax cuts expire. That means the 
tax increases are there.
  They have said they would be the most ethical in terms of earmarks. I 
really dislike that term, ``earmarks,'' it's very negative, but it 
means money sent to a special project by a Member. I don't have any 
problem with money going to certain projects by certain Members. That's 
part of our constitutional responsibility. It should be out in the open 
every time.
  If we, as Members of Congress, are ashamed of where we are sending 
the money, then there must be something wrong with it. If I were to ask 
for money to go to a special project, I would be very proud of that and 
would want the people of my district to know it.

  However, it's obvious that Congressman Murtha does not want the 
people of his district or this country to know where he is sending 
certain dollars,

[[Page H5528]]

partly because that project has been evaluated and deemed to be 
wasteful, as I gave you some quotes.
  This was going to be the Congress that was going to do so much. Not 
any bill of any consequence has passed both Houses and been signed by 
the President. None of their bills that they promised, their Six in 
'06, small ideas. Even they don't do what they said they do.
  I would like to use the example of the student loans. All for last 
year, the Democrats said over and over and over again, oh, we are going 
to bring down the cost of going to college. Students have to borrow too 
much money. We are going to lower the cost of interest rates.
  Well, ladies and gentlemen, what they did was a giant shell game. It 
takes 5 years for them to lower the interest rate on one small program 
that students borrow money from, making up, probably, less than 20 
percent or fewer than 20 percent of the loans out there. It takes 5 
years to get that interest rate brought down to half. The interest rate 
stays half for 3 whole months, and then it goes straight back up to the 
full rate. But they would like the American people to believe that they 
really have done something that they said they were going to do, which 
is not true.
  It's over and over again. They would not raise taxes, the budget 
raised taxes. They would cut spending. Everything that they have done 
is increase spending.
  They said that they would always support our troops. They do not 
support our troops. They have played games here for the last month or 
so, trying to embarrass the President, they think, and try to get 
through, again, more of their pork-barrel projects by putting 
unnecessary spending onto a war supplemental, which, again, is a giant 
shell game, because it would allow them to take $24 billion off-line 
spending, because if it's in the supplemental, they don't have to count 
it against their budget. That gives them $24 billion more they can 
spend somewhere else, and they pass it off as emergency funding. It's 
not emergency funding at all.
  So, they are not supporting our troops, and they are not doing 
anything that they promise to do last year. Again, this latest episode, 
with Congressman Murtha, should send a clear signal to the American 
people that that is what is happening.
  You know, there is an old saying, you can fool some of the people all 
of the time. You can fool all of the people some of the time. But you 
can't fool all of the people all of the time.
  I think that the American people are waking up to the hypocrisy that 
has been going on here by the Democrats, and they are seeing not only 
aren't they fulfilling their promises, but they are doing even worse. 
They are trying to hide everything that they are doing and trying to 
make it look like they are fulfilling their promises, but they are not.
  I want to say, in terms of their insisting on a surrender date, I 
have said this before on the floor, I have never in my life been around 
leaders in our country that talk about failure and impossibility as 
much as these people do. America is a place where we believe in things 
getting done, where everything is possible. We could do it all. We will 
win this war. We have to win the war, because our freedom is at stake.
  All they talk about is surrender date. Every bill that they have 
passed has had surrender dates in it. It has been 105 days since the 
President first requested additional troop funding. While we are trying 
to help get that funding, Republicans are, the Democrats want to choke 
off or ration funding for American troops in harm's way. More of their 
hypocrisy. They don't want to fund the troops.
  Sometimes I think they want failure just to prove a point. Yet, they 
would tear down the freedom that we have to stay in power and to prove 
a point.
  We need a clean troop-funding bill. We need to give our troops the 
resources they need to be successful, no strings, no timelines, no 
pork, and it needs to be done by Memorial Day so that we show the 
troops how we really feel about them, and not this sham that the 
Democrats have been portraying here in the Congress.

                          ____________________