[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 16 (Tuesday, January 27, 2009)]
[House]
[Pages H556-H583]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             AMERICAN RECOVERY AND REINVESTMENT ACT OF 2009

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Holden). Pending any declaration of the 
House into the Committee of the Whole pursuant to House Resolution 88 
for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1--which contains an emergency 
designation for purposes of pay-as-you-go principles--the Chair must 
put the question of consideration under clause 10(c)(3) of rule XXI.
  The question is, ``Will the House now consider the bill?''
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. MICHAUD. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 224, 
noes 199, not voting 10, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 38]

                               AYES--224

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Adler (NJ)
     Altmire
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Bean
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boccieri
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Brown, Corrine
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardoza
     Carnahan
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Clarke
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Dahlkemper
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Doyle
     Driehaus
     Edwards (MD)
     Edwards (TX)
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Foster
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Gonzalez
     Gordon (TN)
     Grayson
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall (NY)
     Halvorson
     Hare
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Heinrich
     Herseth Sandlin
     Higgins
     Hill
     Himes
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hodes
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kagen
     Kennedy
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick (MI)
     Kilroy
     Kind
     Kirkpatrick (AZ)
     Kissell
     Klein (FL)
     Kosmas
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Maffei
     Maloney
     Markey (CO)
     Markey (MA)
     Massa
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McMahon
     McNerney
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mitchell
     Mollohan
     Moore (KS)
     Moore (WI)
     Moran (VA)
     Murphy (CT)
     Murphy, Patrick
     Murtha
     Nadler (NY)
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nye
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Perriello
     Peters
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis (CO)

[[Page H557]]


     Pomeroy
     Price (NC)
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Richardson
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Salazar
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schauer
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sestak
     Shea-Porter
     Sherman
     Sires
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis (CA)
     Speier
     Spratt
     Stupak
     Sutton
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Teague
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Titus
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Welch
     Wexler
     Wilson (OH)
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Yarmuth

                               NOES--199

     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Arcuri
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barrett (SC)
     Barrow
     Bartlett
     Barton (TX)
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehner
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boozman
     Boren
     Boustany
     Boyd
     Brady (TX)
     Bright
     Broun (GA)
     Brown (SC)
     Buchanan
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Campbell
     Cantor
     Cao
     Capito
     Carney
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Castle
     Chaffetz
     Childers
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cooper
     Crenshaw
     Cuellar
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Deal (GA)
     Dent
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Donnelly (IN)
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Ehlers
     Ellsworth
     Emerson
     Fallin
     Flake
     Fleming
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Giffords
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Granger
     Graves
     Griffith
     Guthrie
     Hall (TX)
     Harper
     Hastings (WA)
     Heller
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hoekstra
     Hunter
     Inglis
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Kline (MN)
     Kratovil
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lee (NY)
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Marshall
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McHugh
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McMorris Rodgers
     Melancon
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Minnick
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy, Tim
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nunes
     Olson
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pence
     Peterson
     Petri
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Putnam
     Radanovich
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Royce
     Ryan (WI)
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Scalise
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shimkus
     Shuler
     Shuster
     Simpson
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Space
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Taylor
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Turner
     Upton
     Walden
     Wamp
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Young (FL)

                             NOT VOTING--10

     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Etheridge
     Kingston
     Linder
     Lynch
     McCarthy (NY)
     Pitts
     Stark
     Tiberi
     Young (AK)


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Two minutes remain in this 
vote.

                              {time}  1642

  Mr. BOSWELL changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the question of consideration was decided in the affirmative.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Mrs. McCARTHY of New York. Madam Speaker, today, I was unexpectedly 
detained and missed one vote.
  On rollcall No. 38, on the question of consideration of the bill H.R. 
1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, I would have 
voted ``aye.''
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 88 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1.

                              {time}  1643


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 1) making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and 
creation, infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, 
assistance to the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, 
for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes, 
with Mr. Tierney in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  General debate shall not exceed 3\1/2\ hours, equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee 
on Appropriations, who may yield control of blocks of that time.
  The gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) and the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Lewis) each will control 1 hour and 45 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin.

                              {time}  1645

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, this country is facing what most economists, I believe, 
consider to be the most serious and the most dangerous economic 
situation in our lifetimes, certainly going back to the early thirties.
  If you take a look at what has happened in the country, late last 
year, former President George Bush recognized that the world's credit 
markets were near a state of total collapse, and he asked this Congress 
to take unprecedented action in order to try to prevent that. Since 
that time, we've seen a continued unraveling of financial markets, 
we've seen a continued unraveling of the housing markets, and we've 
seen the most spectacular loss of consumer confidence in the modern 
history of this country. New claims for unemployment insurance last 
week hit 590,000. In the last 2 months alone, we've seen this country 
lose more than a million jobs.
  Consumer purchasing power has evaporated. New home starts fell 15 
percent in December, to the lowest number on record going back more 
than 50 years. And we've seen other evidence of panic in the 
marketplace and on Main Street.
  Normally, when consumer purchasing power collapses, our government 
uses the tool of monetary policy in order to try to resurrect and 
reinflate the economy. The problem is we've already shot that bullet. 
The Federal Reserve has taken phenomenal actions to try to stabilize 
the situation to very moderate effect. And now we're being asked to 
consider the other tool in our arsenal. We're being asked to use fiscal 
policy to expand consumer purchasing power to try and stop the slide. 
And that is what this proposal before us here today will try to do.
  In most recessions, we're eventually led out of those recessions 
through the leadership of the housing sector and the automobile sector. 
This time around, both of those sectors are in shambles, and they're 
not likely to lead anybody out of anything. So that leaves us with very 
limited tools.
  This package today that we are considering is an $825 billion package 
that does a variety of things to try to reinflate the economy. It, 
first of all, provides tax cuts--which Mr. Rangel will discuss--in 
order to try to put some money in people's pockets. We hope that that 
succeeds to a greater extent than the last round of tax rebates did.
  Secondly, this package attempts to jump-start job creation through 
infrastructure investments in roads, bridges, sewers, water repair, 
modernizing our electric power grid and expanding broadband access so 
that all parts of the country have an opportunity to compete, with 
Internet access.
  Third, this package attempts to help those who are most impacted by 
the recession, who are losing their jobs, their health insurance, and 
losing the ability to send their kids to college.
  Fourth, this package attempts to modernize the economy--or at least 
to begin a long process of doing that--by accelerating the development 
of new technology through key investments in science and energy.
  And last, it attempts, also, to save jobs by stabilizing State and 
local budgets. Because of the economic collapse and because of the 
collapse of revenue now forecast at the State and local level, States 
face the need to eliminate gargantuan deficits because they're required 
to balance their budgets. Without help from the Federal Government to 
stabilize their situation, they will be forced to impose

[[Page H558]]

major tax increases and devastating service cutbacks, which under these 
economic conditions would be hugely counterproductive. This package 
attempts to do all of those things.
  Now, none of us can be certain about the degree of success that would 
flow from passage of this package.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield myself 2 additional minutes.
  But the fact is we are as close as we will ever see to being in the 
same position that Franklin Roosevelt was in in the thirties. And at 
that time he tried some things; some of the things he tried worked, 
some of them didn't, and so he moved on and tried other things.
  There is no person on this floor who can guarantee the success of 
this package. Certainly, standing alone, this package will not succeed, 
because it is going to have to be accompanied by further actions to 
build confidence in the economy. It is going to have to be accompanied 
by new actions to prevent massive house foreclosures all across the 
country. We are going to probably have to have even further 
intervention in the financial markets of the country. And this package 
that we have here today, the spending portion of this package, may very 
well undershoot rather than overshoot the target that many economists 
have set out for us.
  When President Bush came to office, I was divided in my judgment 
about whether I should support his first major new initiative, which 
was the No Child Left Behind education package. I had grave misgivings 
about that package, but in the end I supported it, largely because I 
thought that, as the incoming President, the President deserves to have 
the benefit of the doubt. President Obama is in that same situation, 
only in far more dire straits. He has asked the Congress to pass an 
economic recovery package, and this bill today is attempting to do 
that.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield myself 1 additional minute.
  He has asked us to provide a reasonable balance between tax cuts and 
spending increases to revive the ability of consumers to purchase the 
goods and services produced by this society. Unless someone has a 
clearly better idea, I think we have an obligation to support the 
President's proposal, at this point as the only game in town. The risks 
are enormous if we do not move ahead.
  Everyone talks, for instance, about how disappointed they are with 
what the previous Bush administration did with respect to the package 
on Wall Street. I'm certainly extremely unhappy with some of the 
actions taken by Secretary Paulson.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield myself 1 additional minute.
  I believe, nonetheless, that the President was right at the time in 
telling the Congress that if we did not take action, the results could 
have been catastrophic. I believe if we do not take action on this 
package today, the results can be similarly catastrophic. And with 
that, I urge Members to support the package.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
might consume.
  As we begin today's debate, Mr. Chairman and my colleagues, I'd like 
to reiterate my willingness and desire to work with President Obama.
  Mr. President, each of us wants to see you be successful, and we 
welcome the opportunity to work with you and your administration. The 
challenges we face as Americans--not Democrats or Republicans, but 
Americans--are great. We have much work to do.
  Mr. President, it is our sincere hope that we will work together 
across party lines to restore confidence in our economy and create a 
climate conducive to job growth. We can no longer afford to point 
fingers and cast blame. If there was ever a time for our country to 
come together, it is now.
  There is no greater challenge facing working families today than our 
Nation's struggling economy. Each of us can speak passionately and with 
great empathy of people we know in our own districts who have lost 
their jobs, are unable to pay their mortgage, don't have health 
insurance, or are struggling to make ends meet. They are asking for our 
help. As we demonstrate our compassion, let us also be mindful of our 
responsibility to assist those in need without creating an untenable 
situation for future generations. That is the balance we must strive to 
achieve.
  The centerpiece of any stimulus bill ought to be job creation. 
Government has a role; but our constituents are not asking for an 
unlimited expansion of government. They are asking Congress to focus on 
specific sectors of our economy and to provide solutions that will 
offer tangible, near-term results.
  Most of us would agree that the recent $700 billion Troubled Asset 
Relief Program, known as TARP, is an illustration of how good 
intentions don't always deliver desired results. Many Members, I'm 
sure, would like to have their vote back if they voted for that 
package.
  When Congress spends too much too quickly, it doesn't think through 
the details and oversight becomes more difficult. The TARP bill is only 
the most recent example. The lesson learned was this; we cannot manage 
what we do not measure. We simply cannot afford to make the same 
mistake again.
  Public dismay over the lack of transparency in TARP implies a public 
desire for more openness and thoughtful consideration of stimulus 
spending. A Web site is not oversight. Posting $606 billion worth of 
Federal spending on a Web site does not ensure that these funds will be 
well spent. Each and every agency should be required to submit a 
spending plan to Congress--on the front end, not after the fact--to 
ensure that every dollar is spent as intended. Our constituents, Mr. 
Chairman and Members, deserve no less.
  These taxpayers, who will repay this debt over time, also deserve 
specific answers before we spend another nickel of their money. They 
deserve to know how many jobs will be created in 6 months, 12 months, 
18 months, or longer. They deserve to know where these jobs will be 
created, how many of these jobs will be skilled and unskilled 
positions, and whether these jobs will be sustained through higher 
taxes or even more government spending down the road. These are 
thoughtful, reasonable questions deserving a thoughtful and reasonable 
response.
  Many have described this legislation as a transportation and 
infrastructure investment package. However, the fact remains that only 
$30 billion, or 3 percent of the funding, is directed towards ``shovel-
ready'' road and highway spending. The backlog of these projects is 
some $64.3 billion. Similarly, $4.5 billion is allocated for the Corps 
of Engineers for improving flood protection and navigation, when a $61 
billion backlog exists for Corps projects that are fully authorized. 
These are the types of targeted infrastructure investments that will 
create sustainable jobs and should be given even greater priority 
within this package.
  Many Republicans support wellness programs, analog TV conversion 
coupons, and the NEA, for example, but these and many other items in 
this bill don't create jobs and ought to be funded through our regular 
appropriations process. They do not belong in a stimulus bill.

                              {time}  1700

  Nor should a stimulus package be used to establish 32 new government 
programs at a cost of some $136 billion, which this bill does. Thirty-
seven percent of the appropriated dollars in this package, more than $1 
out of every $3, is dedicated to creating new government programs.
  Are we fostering job creation and economic stimulus, or are we simply 
growing the size of government? I know my taxpayers are asking. How 
about yours?
  Our opposition to this package is not based on partisan politics but 
on economic reality. There is tremendous pressure on Congress to 
maintain funding of existing programs even before we create new ones. 
Again, let's take off our partisan hats and look at the sobering facts 
before us.
  Congress recently provided $700 billion for TARP. It's now 
considering $816 billion in this stimulus bill. There is talk of the 
Senate's adding another $70 billion to address the AMT fix. Congress 
will next week, consider a $410 billion omnibus spending bill for the

[[Page H559]]

work we didn't finish last year. And before long we will be considering 
another emergency supplemental spending bill.
  Let's be perfectly honest. All these spending bills are placing a 
tremendous burden of debt on present and future generations. Our 
projected deficit of 2009 is already approaching $1.2 trillion, the 
largest in history, even before we consider this stimulus proposal.
  So what can be done to make this a better and perhaps even a 
bipartisan spending bill? Let me offer four suggestions, Mr. Chairman:
  First, narrow the focus of this bill to those items that provide 
measurable economic stimulus or produce jobs. Spending should be 
targeted to key infrastructure investments that will create jobs over 
the next 2 years. We don't question the urgency of this package. We 
question its priorities and its price tag.
  Secondly, address public concerns over adequate transparency and 
accountability by requiring agencies to submit a spending plan before 
they start spending the money in this package, as we did in the 9/11 
package. Such an approach will ensure that every dollar is spent as 
intended.
  Further, I would suggest that this bill should ensure that it 
captures the full costs associated with waiving cost-sharing 
requirements and hiring of additional Federal employees. Proper 
safeguards are needed to prevent the unintentional growth of government 
over time.
  And, lastly, limit the use of the stimulus bill as a vehicle for 
increasing base funding of popular domestic programs. Large increases 
in these programs create unrealistic expectations for future spending.
  I will conclude my remarks as I began them with a message for our new 
President:
  Mr. President, the challenges we face transcend partisan politics. We 
have an historic opportunity to work together to craft a stimulus 
package that Republicans and Democrats can support. We appeal to you to 
include us in this process. We wish you and your family Godspeed and 
welcome the opportunity to work with you, Mr. President.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.


                       Announcement by the Chair

  The CHAIR. Members are reminded to address their remarks to the 
Chair.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to the rule, I yield 15 minutes to 
the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Rangel; 15 minutes to 
the chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, Mr. Waxman; 10 
minutes to the chairman of the Education and Labor Committee, Mr. 
Miller; 10 minutes to the chairman of the Transportation and 
Infrastructure Committee, Mr. Oberstar; 5 minutes to Ms. Giffords of 
the Science and Technology Committee; 5 minutes to the chairwoman of 
the Small Business Committee, Ms. Velazquez; 5 minutes to the chairman 
of the Budget Committee, Mr. Spratt; and 2 minutes to the chairman of 
the Government Investigations Committee, Mr. Towns.
  The CHAIR. Members so designated will control the time mentioned.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  (Mr. RANGEL asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. RANGEL. My colleagues, someone once said that when the going gets 
tough, the tough get going. I think of our great country, knowing that 
through the Depression, that's just what happened. We came back 
stronger, more competitive, and became a nation that was respected. I 
remember so clearly in 1941 they thought America was a loser. We almost 
lost our entire fleet. But what happened after that? Again America came 
back stronger as a world power economically and militarily. And now 
we're in trouble again.
  This $275 billion bill brings relief. The Ways and Means Committee is 
proud to bring this to you for your consideration. It doesn't help our 
banks. It doesn't help our fiscal institutions. They don't cry. But 
those of us who go back home know who's doing the crying: those people 
who work hard every day, and yet they're losing their jobs, they're 
losing their dignity, they're losing their homes, they can't put food 
on the table.
  There is only one way to do it, and that is to be equitable and to 
make certain that we have a decent and fair response to their tax 
relief, and that's what we intend to do.
  We provide $144 million to people who work every day to put food on 
the table, to be able to get clothes for their children. And the reason 
they don't have confidence is because they don't have money, and we 
provide that for them. For families that are low income that have 
children, we try to provide something not only for those people who 
don't have tax liability immediately but to relieve them of that 
payroll tax, because at the end of the day, it's what you take home and 
not what you call it.
  For working families we have the earned income tax credit. And we 
tried desperately hard to make certain that for those people who have 
lost their jobs that they not lose their dignity, they not lose their 
health insurance, and that they be able to get education and 
retraining.
  For small businesses, unless we have the people who are working that 
have resources to be able to buy, we try to help our small businesses 
by giving them an easy opportunity to depreciate and to buy equipment 
and not to have to lay off.
  And one of the most important parts of our bill is something that 
they'll never be able to take away from our great country, and that is 
education and technology training. So we can come back stronger. We can 
come back notwithstanding what's happening here. And I can't see 
anybody in this House going back home saying we didn't do enough 
because for those that are out there feeling the pain of what we're 
going through, they are just waiting for relief to be coming. And our 
President has promised this, our leadership has promised this, and this 
is the time for the Congress to be a part of that.
  The health information technology is not only going to save lives, 
it's going to be able to say at the end of the day that we moved 
forward to make our country healthier, better educated, knowing more 
about technology. And once we do that, when people ask how are you 
going to pay back the money, you don't pay it as a sick Nation. You pay 
it back as an educated, healthy Nation that restored the dignity and 
prosperity that we know. And so we find Members will have ribbons on, 
and I refer you to the Record to know more about the bill.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the 
original chairman of the Homeland Security Subcommittee of 
Appropriations, the gentleman from Kentucky, Hal Rogers.
  (Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. Mr. Chairman, there is no question but that 
the Congress must act swiftly and boldly to counteract the downturn in 
the economy. But there's a difference between actions that are swift 
and bold and spending huge sums of borrowed money irresponsibly.
  When the dust finally settles on this boondoggle, perhaps then we 
will face the facts regarding this colossal trillion dollar spending 
bill. And the fact is that the Pelosi-Obey bill isn't an economic 
stimulus plan at all, but a rampant spending spree, much of which has 
nothing to do with bailing out a sagging economy, but with a liberal 
litany of left-leaning, big government programs.
  We need a true stimulus bill. That much we can all agree on. But it 
needs to be aimed directly at creating jobs. It needs to give real 
incentives to small businesses, which create three out of four new jobs 
in the country. It needs to have a strict oversight program, given the 
recent TARP fiasco. And it needs to solely focus on stimulating the 
economy, not a mandate to overspend on a broad range of government 
programs.
  First, this bill is not aimed directly at job creation. According to 
the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan office, only 40 percent 
of the discretionary funds in this bill will actually stimulate the 
economy and create jobs by 2010. Economists all across the Nation 
question the wisdom of the U.S. Government's competing for debt 
financing, when our small businesses are

[[Page H560]]

struggling to refinance their own debt. How does squeezing out our 
small business owners help create jobs in this troubled economy?
  Editorial boards across the country are questioning the spending 
priorities that have needlessly crept into this bill: $50 million for 
the National Endowment for the Arts, $200 million for tree trimming and 
sod planting on the National Mall, $150 million for Smithsonian 
facility upgrades, $16 billion in Pell grants for college students.
  To quote The Washington Post, which I rarely do: ``All of those ideas 
may have merit, but why do they belong in an emergency measure aimed to 
kick-start the economy?''
  If the majority wants to debate funding for the arts, let's do it in 
the annual Interior Appropriations bill. If the majority wants to 
increase Pell grant funding, bring it up through the annual education 
spending bill that's coming up shortly. And if you want to go out and 
borrow another $825 billion from your children in the name of saving 
the economy, we should demand that it be spent producing jobs for 
Americans.
  The true drivers of this economy, the small business owners, are 
literally left out in the cold. While we're planting sod and cleaning 
up trash on the National Mall to the tune of $200 million, we are only 
allocating a fraction of that amount to our small business owners 
across the Nation in the form of tax breaks. It's not hard to see where 
the true priorities lie with this majority.
  Second, who knows where this money will go? The bill fails to demand 
a full accounting of the funds before they are allocated. Last week's 
disapproval vote of more TARP funds would make you think that we'd 
learned a thing or two about writing a blank check to the 
administration without seeing how they intend to spend it. But 
apparently we haven't.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman an 
additional minute.
  Mr. ROGERS of Kentucky. When the Appropriations Committee considered 
this legislation last week, the minority put forth several thoughtful, 
fiscally-responsible proposals to prioritize infrastructure investment 
and demand greater accountability, all denied on a party-line vote.
  I proposed an amendment that withheld a portion of these funds until 
a simple spending plan was submitted to Congress, a plan requiring 
expenditure details, all rejected. It's a sad day when the majority 
won't even allow the formulation of a plan before spending bonanzas 
begin.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill should be about encouraging our small 
businesses to create jobs and providing the proper oversight and 
accountability that working families deserve. Unfortunately, this bill 
fails miserably on both counts.
  If money is no object, if success is not your goal, if accountability 
is not important to you, vote for this bill. But I urge Members to 
oppose this bill and support a bill that actually creates jobs and 
demands accountability for the taxpayers.

                              {time}  1715

  Mr. RANGEL. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
McDermott), who will share with you our concern about people who have 
lost their jobs.
  (Mr. McDERMOTT asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
his remarks.)
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Mr. Chairman, every day and every corner of this 
Nation, and every sector of this economy, the casualties keep mounting. 
Seventy-five thousand people lost their jobs yesterday, at Alcoa, 
Boeing, Caterpillar, Home Depot, Intel, Microsoft, Pfizer, Sprint, 
Texas Instruments and many small businesses. Over 11 million Americans 
have already lost their jobs, the highest level in 25 years, and every 
major economist says it's going to get worse before it gets better.
  Behind every number is a personal story of an American family 
struggling to cope with and survive this economic crisis. Behind every 
story is an American who deserves our help, who has earned our help on 
the job and has every right to expect Congress to act with all 
deliberate speed. We must not let them down.
  Helping these Americans while they look for work is not only the 
right thing to do for them, it is the only thing we can do in our 
economy. Unemployment insurance is one of the most effective forms of 
economic stimulus, because jobless Americans have little choice but to 
spend the money that's given them.
  Every unemployment insurance dollar spent returns an economic impact 
of $1.64. That's the kind of significant return on investment that will 
help America restart its economic engine. This recovery engine responds 
to rising unemployment with a historic level of assistance. It provides 
$27 billion for a program of extended benefits. For the first time 
ever, this legislation provides financial incentives for States to 
modernize their unemployment insurance programs and increase access to 
benefits.
  For the first time ever, this legislation provides a Federal 
supplement to increase unemployment benefits by an extra $100 a month 
for the next year, and, again for the first time, we will provide 
assistance to unemployed workers who are trying to afford health care 
coverage. The primary goal of this legislation is to create jobs, but 
we must also help the unemployed as those jobs are being created, and 
this measure does just that. By voting for this bill, we are standing 
up for the American people and standing alongside the American people 
right where we belong.
  I urge support for this critically important legislation.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf), a member of the committee.
  (Mr. WOLF asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. WOLF. Mr. Chairman, I think this bill really ignores the major 
issue that we are really facing. Our Nation is fundamentally broke, but 
we have $57 trillion of unfunded obligations. The Ways and Means 
Committee, with all due respect, is doing nothing about dealing with 
this issue.
  I have a bill in with Jim Cooper and Senator Conrad, Senators Conrad 
and Gregg have it over on the Senate side, that creates a bipartisan 
commission similar to what we did on the Iraq Study Group with every 
spending program, including Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security and 
tax policy. Some on my side won't like that, a tax policy on the table, 
and we give the commission 1 year to go around the country holding 
public hearings, coming up with a proposal to require, to require this 
institution that has fundamentally failed to do its responsibility.
  Now, China holds a large portion of our debt. People talk about it, 
but yet nobody does anything about it. If the Chair of the Ways and 
Means Committee gets on the train in Washington and takes it to New 
York City and looks to the right and to the left, the factories are in 
decay. There is graffiti all over the walls, the windows are broken. 
You come through my old neighborhood in Philadelphia, and it's in 
decay.
  By doing this, by getting control of our spending in a way that would 
honestly do it in a bipartisan way, I would tell the Chair of the 
committee, we would bring about a renaissance in this Nation whereby we 
would have the ability to invest in Alzheimer's research and autism 
research and cancer research and manufacturing to create new jobs that 
really show that America is back. So I think the failure of this bill 
is that this provision is not in it.
  The last issue is, I call it the father amendment or the mother 
amendment or the grandmother/grandmother amendment, all of us at some 
time are going to get an opportunity, and we are going to leave here. 
And our grandkids are going to say, you know, Dad, when you were there, 
or Mom, when you were there, or Grandpop, when you were there, or 
Grandmom, when you were there, did you know that China was buying our 
debt up? Did you know the Saudis were buying our debt up? Did you 
really know, Grandfather or Grandmother, that our factories were in 
decay? Did you know that they controlled our debt? Did you? Did you, 
Pop? Pop, did you do anything about it? Dad, did you do anything about 
it?
  And the answer is, as of now, this Congress, and let me just say, 
both political parties, have fundamentally

[[Page H561]]

failed. So you are going to have to tell your kids and your grandkids, 
no.
  When I was there, as of January of 2009, we did nothing, and we 
allowed our country to fall into decline. This amendment ought to be, 
it ought to be in the Republican substitute, and it's not, and I voted 
against the Republican substitute. It ought to be in this, and it's 
not, and I voted against this. And if this does not pass, Barack Obama 
will preside over the decline of this Nation when he is running for 
reelection as President of this Nation in 4 years.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer), who is going to share with us his dreams about 
a country that is not dependent on fossil fuel.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Thank you. I appreciate the gentleman's recognition. 
I appreciate Mr. Levin's courtesy.
  I have been listening to our friends on the other side of the aisle. 
These are the architects of the Bush economic meltdown, who have given 
him billions and billions and billions of borrowed dollars, blank 
checks, to the last administration. All of a sudden, they are fiscally 
interested.
  Well, let me just say, we just left a Budget Committee meeting where 
we had five brilliant respected Ph.D.s from all across the spectrum who 
said we are on uncharted water, you should err on the side of a larger 
stimulus, not a smaller, and that one of the most important areas deals 
with energy.
  I am proud that we have taken these provisions that we have been 
dancing around for the last 3 or 4 years and playing Russian roulette 
with where the private sector couldn't invest in them. It was on again, 
off again. Now we have made them certain and indefinite. We have 
encouraged these investments by increasing the level and giving them a 
longer period of time to cope with them.
  I think all of us ought to embrace this. These are provisions that 
are investing in our energy future. They are going to create jobs, they 
are going to fight global warming, and they are going to help us in the 
international arena.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston), a member of the committee.
  Mr. KINGSTON. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I was in a meeting today with the Republican Party and President 
Obama, and we pledged to work with him to turn this economy around, and 
we feel very serious about working with the President on a bipartisan 
basis.
  But as we look at the stimulus package, I don't think this is quite 
what he had in mind. Only 7 percent of the appropriation goes to 
shovel-ready projects, only 13 percent in general goes to public works-
type projects. At that rate it spends $275,000 per job, and the 
household income for America is about $50,000. This is not bold enough 
in terms of job creation for the targeted 3 to 4 million jobs.
  The second part is this bill creates 32 brand new Federal programs at 
a cost of $136 billion, new spending, and yet we didn't have hearings 
on all of these new programs.
  Then it has extension of some spending that we already have, millions 
of dollars for contraceptives, $50 million for the National Endowment 
for the Arts, $200 million for grass resodding on The Mall. In fact, 
for every $1 in small business tax relief, this bill gives $4 to resod 
The National Mall, and $600 million to prepare the country for 
universal health care.
  And then, as Mr. Wolf said, we are going to talk about the debt. Our 
Nation is $10.6 trillion in debt.
  Now, the worst Republican deficit was $412 billion. The Democrats 
this quarter will exceed $1 trillion in deficit spending and, as Mr. 
Walz said, we owe $3 trillion to other countries, led by China.
  I sit on the Agriculture Committee. We have about $26 billion in the 
Agriculture portion of this bill, but only $1.7 billion is spent on 
public works, things that will create jobs. The rest of it is 
traditional left-wing spending, expansion of the Food Stamp Program, 
even though food stamps has an automatic enrollment, and it also has an 
automatic inflation guard. But we are increasing food stamps.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds.
  Mr. KINGSTON. This changes our $400 million loan program to extend 
broadband, changes it to a $2.8 billion grant program, thus creating 
one of the largest corporate welfare elements that's out there--and I 
don't know how that creates jobs--and $23 million for the Inspector 
General for audits, and how does that create jobs. There are better 
ways.
  We should reduce unfunded mandates, we should increase the public 
works, we should have more tax cuts for small business, we should 
implement the SAFE Act, and we should reward responsible behavior.


                       Announcement by the Chair

  The CHAIR. All Members are advised not to traffic in the well when a 
Member is under recognition, as a matter of courtesy.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington (Mr. 
Dicks).
  Mr. KINGSTON. I want to say I apologize.
  Mr. DICKS. Well, I accept the gentleman's apology, but he was 
inaccurate on what he said. That is something I cannot forgive him for.
  Out of the $200 million for The Mall, $150 million is to save the 
Jefferson Monument from sinking, sinking, into the Tidal Basin. Only 
part of the money is used to resod the grass, and, there is money also 
to protect and restore the Sylvan Theater as well.
  There is a national group that has organized to restore The National 
Mall. We just saw $1.8 million Americans come and stand on that Mall. 
It is a national treasure. It is part of the Park Service. It deserves 
to be fixed.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
chairman of our committee, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Frelinghuysen).
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, there is no greater challenge facing our families and 
businesses today with our Nation's struggling economy. The past few 
months have been absolutely traumatic for many. There is genuine 
anxiety and fear about job security, loss of savings, a serious drop in 
home values and the decline of the value of personal investments.
  As a result, consumer confidence is at historic lows. Quite 
correctly, Americans are asking for help. We must respond by passing an 
economic package as quickly as possible. However, we must make sure 
that that response is effective, efficient and timely.
  Unfortunately, the bill the majority has placed before us today does 
not meet those common-sense standards. Clearly, many Americans find 
themselves in real trouble and in need of relief. Provisions of this 
bill, such as the extended unemployment benefits, nutrition assistance 
and job training are critically important to help many Americans 
struggle through hard times. However, they have little to do with 
creating 3 to 4 million jobs.
  However, there is a significant role for government to play in the 
targeted infrastructure, investment, roads, tunnels, bridges, sewers, 
flood control.

                              {time}  1730

  As Mr. Lewis said earlier, many of the majority have described this 
legislation as a transportation and infrastructure investment package. 
However, only $30 billion of that, or 3 percent of the funding, is 
directed towards shovel-ready road and highway spending that would 
immediately create jobs. And there's a $61 billion backlog in Army 
Corps projects that could be addressed immediately.
  According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, less than 
half the spending in this stimulus package will be paid out in the next 
2 years. At that rate, an economic recovery will probably outrun most 
of that spending.
  This should worry all Americans. This isn't just a stimulus package; 
it is legislation jam packed with a lot of domestic spending, even if 
there's no evidence that that spending will create jobs or prevent 
layoffs.
  I note that the majority proposes a $79 billion State stabilization 
fund. Apparently, this program is designed to bail out some--I repeat--
some States that did little to control their own spending and bonded 
indebtedness in recent years.
  Take my own State of New Jersey as an example. In the last 6 years, 
New Jersey State spending has increased by

[[Page H562]]

$11 billion, and our State's debt has more than doubled to $36 billion. 
Clearly, this is not a picture of restraint. Add to that picture some 
of the highest taxes in income taxes in the Nation.
  In other words, while the Federal budget deficit has exploded, 
Federal taxpayers are now supposed to pull some State governments out 
of a fiscal hole that was partially of their own making.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 1 minute. Mr. Chairman, if we 
are going to quote CBO, we ought to quote CBO accurately. In fact, the 
Congressional Budget Office has said that, in their estimate, 65 
percent of the money in this bill will be spent in the next 2 years. 
The administration's estimate is 75 percent.
  I would point out CBO also says that over the next 2 years this bill 
will inject $526 billion into the economy, and they state that the 
implementation of this bill ``would have a noticeable impact on 
economic growth and employment in the next few years.'' That is a whole 
lot better than doing nothing.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to a member 
of the committee, the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Tiahrt).
  Mr. TIAHRT. I thank the gentleman from California.
  Mr. Chairman, there is no argument that our economy is on a downhill 
slide. Chairman Obey conveyed that very well in his opening remarks. 
But there is an argument on how we get out of this economic slide 
downwards.
  The bill before us is based on the philosophy that government 
spending will stir the economy. It will not. Historically, we know that 
bailouts and government spending simply don't work.
  During the Great Depression, high Federal spending did not save our 
economy. Instead, it remained stagnant. World War II built the 
industrial base. And it was in the 1950s, with the private sector, that 
drove us to a number one economy in the world.
  In the 1990s, Japan tried to stimulate their economy with the bailout 
of banks and with federal government spending. They borrowed the 
equivalent of $250 billion and spent it. What happened? Their economy 
remained stagnant, and their average per capita income went from second 
in the world to tenth in the world.
  This bill has the same idea that failed in the 1930s and failed in 
Japan: borrowed money, Federal spending. But there is a better plan. 
Let's get the money directly to working Americans.
  Let's cancel the unauthorized and new programs and new spending in 
this bill and return it in the form of waived payroll taxes for working 
Americans. Give them a vacation from payroll taxes. It will be like a 
10 percent pay raise.
  We all know what they will do with it. They will do one of three 
things. They will either save it, which helps the banks recapitalize 
and creates mortgages and home sales; or they will spend it, which 
creates a demand for goods and a demand for more jobs; or they will 
invest it, which means companies can expand their businesses and hire 
more employees.
  All we have to do is exchange the unauthorized new government 
spending and transfer that money back to hardworking Americans who earn 
the money. A very simple concept that will have a direct stimulation to 
our economy. And it will happen this year. We will not be waiting until 
2010 or 2011 or 2012 or 2013. It will happen this year.
  So let's cancel those new unauthorized programs and give back the 
taxes to working Americans and get the economy rolling.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Levin).
  (Mr. LEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. LEVIN. Well, the opponents of this bill say there is a dramatic 
set of conditions that are new, but they have too narrow a focus, and 
they are singing the same old song, and we just heard it.
  There are crises of confidence in this country, and this bill 
addresses it. There's a crisis of confidence in jobs. This bill 
addresses the need for jobs and for those who lose them. Families are 
worried about the education of their kids, and they wonder whether the 
government will respond. This bill provides, I think, $140 billion to 
make sure that the education of the kids in this country will continue.
  Families are worried about whether health care will continue. This 
bill provides dramatic new provisions for health care for 8 million 
families, at least, in this country.
  Vote for this bill.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to a member 
of this committee, the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. Latham).
  Mr. LATHAM. I thank the ranking member.
  Mr. Chairman, we all know that we are in unprecedented economic times 
that call for unprecedented action. The bill we have under 
consideration is certainly unprecedented because of the size itself. 
$825 billion. That is just for now, without the add-ons we expect over 
in the Senate.
  This measure will have an unprecedented impact on the deficit by 
increasing it by hundreds of billions of dollars over the next few 
years. In turn, this dramatic rise will trigger large-scale borrowing 
from the future incomes of our children and our grandchildren.
  These add-on deficits will cause the Nation's debt to soar to a level 
at which we will owe interest payments of more than $750 billion per 
year by the year 2019, according to the Congressional Budget Office. 
Those numbers assume that the stimulus package actually works--and we 
don't know for certain that it will work.
  I raise these points because with spending numbers this high, we need 
to get it right. While there are certainly some good qualities to this 
bill, there are also numerous elements thus far, including spendout 
rates noted by CBO, that raise questions about the stimulus impact of 
the bill. Currently, there are estimates on the job creation potential 
of the bill that show only about 10 percent of the funds creating jobs. 
If those estimates are accurate, the question arises as to where the 
other funds are going.
  Some analyses show that the lion's share of the monies in this bill 
are destined for expansion of an assortment of government programs that 
have nothing to do with economic stimulus. Moreover, these programs are 
ones that are funded each year through the normal appropriations 
process, and will be funded again in 2010.
  That tells me that we are using this bill to expand the funding scope 
of certain programs in order to make room for additional spending in 
the 2010 cycle. We are calling this extra spending ``emergency'' 
spending so we will not have to find a way to pay for it. Whether we 
call it emergency, or something else, the deficit effect is still the 
same, and our children will pay for it.
  Many of these programs already have large, unexpended balances. For 
example, there's $5 billion for public housing. Yet, we have close to 
$7 billion in unexpended public housing balances.
  Many of the proponents of this bill talk of the need to rebuild the 
Nation's highway and bridge infrastructure, and speak of the job 
creation potential of these activities. Yet, the highway portion of 
this bill contains less than 4 percent of the total funding.
  I am very supportive of legitimate stimulus that results in net 
economic activity and job creation. For that reason, I offered an 
amendment in the full committee designed to ensure that all stimulus 
funds would produce net economic activity and not supplant existing 
funds. I also cosponsored an amendment with Mr. Frelinghuysen that 
would have moved some $60 billion to transportation, flood control, and 
environmental restoration projects.
  Ladies and gentlemen, our children and grandchildren are going to pay 
for this debt.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield myself 15 seconds. My friend from Iowa says that 
this bill is too big. I will make a deal with him. I will be happy to 
give him a smaller bill if he will show me a smaller problem.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Speaking of smaller problems, I might 
mention I had hoped that the chairman put that Jefferson Memorial 
problem in the 2009 bill, which is yet to be passed, through the whole 
process.
  I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Emerson.)
  Mrs. EMERSON. Let me say how pleased I am to be the ranking member of 
the Financial Services and General Government Subcommittee for the

[[Page H563]]

111th Congress and look forward to working cooperatively with Chairman 
Serrano.
  Regarding the Financial Services section of the recovery bill we are 
debating today, I am disappointed that neither I nor the minority's 
committee staff were given an opportunity to consult with the majority 
members or staff before the bill was produced and unveiled on the 
Internet.
  One percent. One percent sound like a small amount but in this bill 
even one-tenth of 1 percent is not trivial. Here's an example. This 
bill includes $7.7 billion for the GSA to build and renovate new 
Federal buildings and ports of entry. It's nearly 1 percent of the 
bill. However, in fiscal year 2008, GSA received a total appropriation 
of only $1.4 billion for construction and renovations.
  Now, most of us know from personal experience that GSA construction 
projects in our districts are hardly ever completed on time, and never 
under budget. At its highest levels, this is an agency that needs a 
wake-up call and a good scrubbing behind the ears. What it does not 
need is 5\1/2\ years' worth of annual budget appropriations to spend in 
120 days, a task it most certainly cannot accomplish with any semblance 
of efficiency.
  GSA lacks the contracting, program management and building 
engineering expertise to go from $1.4 billion in appropriations to $7.7 
billion in just 1 year. Giving GSA the keys to nearly 1 percent of the 
stimulus package will result in gross mismanagement and future funding 
liabilities.
  Additionally, according to lists provided by GSA of the projects they 
list that can be awarded within 120 days, 36 percent, or $2 billion, 
are in Washington, DC. In a bill for the economic health of our entire 
Nation, Washington is surely getting the lion's share.
  I am also concerned with $600 million in the bill for the purchase of 
vehicles for Federal agencies. The bill states that these are to be 
primarily alternative fuel and plug-in hybrid vehicles, technologies I 
greatly support. However, there's currently no U.S. production for 
plug-in vehicles, and they won't be here until after the deadline of 
this bill has passed.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield the gentlelady 30 additional 
seconds.
  Mrs. EMERSON. Additionally, the lack of fueling stations for these 
vehicles could produce a fleet of cars and trucks in this country that 
could create new obstacles for Federal agencies. Even David Brooks of 
the New York Times noted that concerns such as this one ``were cast 
aside with bland reassurances'' in our committee markup of this bill.
  Mr. Chair, this is neither what we should be doing with the 
taxpayers' money, nor how we should be doing it.
  Mr. RANGEL. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Doggett).
  Mr. DOGGETT. One way this bill promotes economic recovery is by 
promoting educational opportunity. $13\1/2\ billion of targeted tax 
relief to help young people and not so young people attend college. 
Today, one out of five graduating high school students does not qualify 
for this assistance. But, because we provided a refundable tax credit, 
we help them, just as the appropriations section of this bill helps 
with expanded Pell Grants and other direct aid.
  For one of these, Brad Burnett at Austin Community College, he says, 
``Getting a college education means breaking a generations' long cycle 
of poverty within my family that lets me fulfill the American dream.''
  For the first time, we cover textbooks and instructional materials 
under this bill. As we provide this individual opportunity, we upgrade 
the skills of our workforce and help climb out of this economic 
recession. For students, this is a bill that provides hope we can 
believe in. And for every one of these students who uses the 
opportunities in this bill, it can provide a diploma that they can 
count on.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson).
  Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the ranking member for the time. Everyone on 
this floor agrees that something needs to be done in terms of 
stimulating this economy. We all know that we are in difficult times. I 
also agree with Speaker Pelosi that any stimulus plan needs to be 
timely, temporary, and targeted.
  It is timely. We need to do something. We know we need to do it 
quickly. Targeted. This would be targeted if your weapon was a scatter 
gun, because everything but the kitchen sink has been thrown into this 
appropriation bill.

                              {time}  1745

  Temporary? It would take a stretch of the imagination to believe that 
this was temporary.
  Today, President Obama came and spoke with us. He said that he didn't 
want programs started that had what he called ``a long tail,'' and that 
meant that it contributed to the long-term deficit of this country and 
that they were going to have to cut in later years.
  I will tell you that there is nothing as eternal on this earth as a 
temporary government program. We all know that. I give you one example, 
school construction. We are going to start a school construction 
program. It has never been authorized before, but we are going to start 
one here. Does anybody really believe that we will then end it after 3 
or 4 or 5 years whenever this slowdown in our economy turns around? It 
will be going on forever. We all know that.
  We have a number of programs that have never been debated; I can't 
remember the exact number, something like 32 new authorizations, that 
have never been debated in committee. They may be appropriate, I don't 
know, but we have never debated them to see if they should be 
authorized and whether they can compete against other programs for the 
limited amount of money. Well, the unlimited amount of money we 
apparently have in this bill.
  In other cases, the spend-out is 3 or 4 or 5 years down the road. And 
I would ask you, why are we appropriating money for a program that will 
spend out money in 4 or 5 years down the road when we all hope that 
this economy has turned around? But yet, we are appropriating money now 
for that spend-out. It just doesn't make sense.
  Why don't we go through the regular appropriation process to do that? 
I will give you one example dealing with the National Mall that we have 
talked about here today.
  The Tidal Basin work alone has had huge swings in cost estimates for 
the very complicated and extensive work. In late December, the Park 
Service told the subcommittee that the Mall work alone could cost $600 
million, and now that number is $20 million. In late December, the Park 
Service Budget Office told the subcommittee staff that they could use 
only $15 million to $20 million for planning and design the next 2 
years, which seemed honest and logical given the size of the plan. Now, 
they claim they can spend over $200 million over the next 2 years.
  Our problem is that these things should be going through the regular 
appropriation process, and they are not. And there is a reason that 
they are not: It is because every idea that anyone has ever had for 
spending that they think is appropriate has been thrown into this bill 
to avoid the PAYGO rules. We all know that is the case, and we need to 
redo this bill and target it.
  Mr. RANGEL. At this time I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Thompson), who will share his idea of a new America.
  Mr. THOMPSON of California. Mr. Chairman, the green stimulus 
provisions in this bill will generate tens of thousands of jobs and 
result in billions of dollars in economic investment.
  Solar tax provisions that I authored will allow State and local 
governments, like Sonoma County in my district, to help homeowners and 
businesses more easily finance the purchase of solar. We are also 
making other critical investments in solar by creating a grant program 
to incentivize businesses to invest in renewable technology today, 
instead of waiting until the economy improves. An additional $4 billion 
in bonds for use in renewable energy projects will be available for 
State and local governments as well.
  These are just a few of the green stimulus provisions. Not only will 
this bill create green jobs that our economy needs today, but it will 
also enhance the long-term security and sustainability of our economy 
by investing in a smart-energy future that helps free us from our 
dependency on foreign oil.

[[Page H564]]

I encourage everyone to vote ``aye'' on this bill.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to yield 3 minutes 
to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Crenshaw).
  Mr. CRENSHAW. I thank the gentleman for yielding the time.
  Let me say that a lot of people I hear say they want to oppose this 
package because you really can't spend your way out of a recession; 
and, therefore, if spending is the only answer, then why not spend 
twice as much and get out of the problem twice as fast? But those same 
people think that maybe you shouldn't do anything, and I think they are 
just as wrong, to stand here and do nothing in the midst of this 
tremendous economic crisis.
  But I do think we have to put a test to anything we try to do. It was 
pointed out earlier, and I have heard a lot of discussion: If you are 
going to have a stimulus package, it ought to meet certain criteria. It 
ought to be focused, targeted, if you will; it ought to be timely in 
the sense that it ought to begin to act immediately; and it ought not 
to last forever. And it seems to me, when I look at those three 
criteria, this package fails on all three counts. It is not focused. It 
is not targeted. It seems to be a hodgepodge, just kind of quickly 
thrown together, 152 different appropriations. No strategic vision 
involved, no underlying theme, just a little bit of spending on 
everything you wanted to spend money on but were afraid to ask, until 
now. And it, I think clearly, in so many cases doesn't pretend to be 
timely. When you do research, when you do student special education, 
how does that quickly kick-start the economy? It fails that test. And, 
finally, if we badly design a package like this, it will continue on, 
and the $1.2 trillion deficit becomes $2 trillion.
  So I think there is a better way, and I think the Republicans have 
put forward that; because if we go through with a poorly, badly 
designed stimulus package, we are going to end up, in the words of 
Tennessee Ernie Ford, his old song, when he said we will just end up 
``another day older and deeper in debt.'' So I think there is a better 
way.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 1 minute to my friend 
from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
  Mr. PASCRELL. Many of us in this body, including myself, have been 
speaking about the perfect storm developing in this economy before 9/
11. The truth is, we should have taken this aggressive action years 
ago. Today, we have finally constructed legislation which directly 
invests in the good people of America.
  Through middle-class tax cuts, direct aid to State and local 
governments, and reinvestment in renewable energy, Congress is taking 
an affirmative step to enable economic recovery.
  Mr. Chairman, just think of how municipalities will be able to take 
advantage of tax exempt bonds and tax credit bonds, and I speak as a 
former mayor, in depressed areas throughout the United States to 
provide municipalities with the wherewithal to really, really move this 
economy and provide jobs to our American people.
  To ensure our children can compete and succeed in the troubling 
economy, we will renovate and modernize 10,000 schools. Who said it 
didn't work back in the thirties? Who said it?
  Through this bill we also make college affordable and provide a 
$2,500 college tax credit to 4 million students, and triple the number 
of fellowships in science to help spur the next generation of 
innovation.
  This legislation invests American tax dollars in real infrastructure 
projects that are ready to go. Specifically, this plan allocates money 
for the repairing and modernizing of thousands of miles of America's 
roadways and providing new mass transit options for millions of 
Americans.
  I want to commend my colleagues for their leadership and commitment 
to taking an explicit and aggressive lead in the creation of a 
comprehensive economic recovery and reinvestment package.
  I urge all of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to take swift 
and decisive action to pass this legislation.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).
  Mr. McCLINTOCK. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, with this measure the new administration seems bound 
and determined to continue the failed policy of the past 
administration. It proves what I like to call McClintock's Second Law 
of Political Physics, which is, the more we spend on our mistakes, the 
less willing we are to admit them.
  This policy has failed every time and every place it has been tried 
for a simple reason: Government cannot inject a single dollar into the 
economy that it has not first taken out of the same economy.
  If I take a dollar from Peter and give it to Paul, it is true that 
Paul now has an extra dollar to spend; and, when he spends it, that 
dollar is going to ripple through the economy. The gentleman is 
correct. But the gentleman forgets that Peter now has one less dollar 
to spend in that same economy. In short, it nets to zero. In fact, it 
nets to less than zero, because we are shifting enormous resources away 
from investments that would be based on economic calculations in favor 
of investments that are being made on political ones.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank the chairman, and rise in strong support of 
this legislation because of the boost it will provide to our ailing 
economy and the priority investments it makes in our Nation. To 
struggling families and communities around the country, with the 
passage of this bill we can say help is on the way.
  We have heard from economists from all sides of the political 
spectrum, and they all agree inaction and doing nothing is not an 
option. We need to join together with our new President, President 
Obama, and act boldly and decisively, and that is what this legislation 
does, by directing $825 billion in stimulus where it is needed most, 
ready-to-go projects to put people back to work, investing in clean 
energy and the infrastructure we need for the 21st century, and middle-
class tax relief for struggling American families so they have a little 
more breathing room in their budgets.
  I am especially pleased with the provisions relating to energy 
efficiency and renewable energy that we have worked on, on a bipartisan 
basis, loan guarantees for renewable energy projects that are sidelined 
because of the credit crunch, and new authority for homeowners to 
retrofit their homes.
  I urge passage of this legislation.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I am proud to yield 1 minute 
to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Broun).
  Mr. BROUN of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I have a question for my Democratic colleagues: How would $50 million 
for the National Endowment of the Arts possibly stimulate our economy? 
It won't. And the thing is that this whole bill is actually a 
steamroller of socialism that is being forced down our throats, and the 
economy is going to choke to death on this steamroller of socialism 
that you all are bringing forward.
  It is a nonstimulus bill. It is not going to stimulate the economy. 
It is going to create very few jobs, if any at all. For every dollar of 
tax relief, you all are going to spend $4 to put new grass on the 
Washington Mall. It is insane. It is absolutely insane the things that 
are in this bill.
  I am going to vote ``no,'' and I encourage my colleagues to vote 
``no,'' and I encourage the American people to stand up and say we are 
not going to tolerate this kind of stuff going on in this country.
  We have got to slow down. We have got to look at alternatives that 
really will stimulate the economy, that is by reducing taxes and 
leaving dollars in the hands of the American public.
  Mr. RANGEL. I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from Nevada (Ms. 
Berkley), a hardworking member of the committee.
  Ms. BERKLEY. I thank the chairman for yielding.
  I grew up in my congressional district of Las Vegas. By any standard 
of measure, it has been a boomtown; record increases in population, 
almost no unemployment, record home ownership.
  What a difference an economic meltdown can make. Nevada's economy, 
fueled by construction and tourism, has suffered beyond all imagination 
in this financial crisis. Las Vegas has the highest mortgage 
foreclosure rate in

[[Page H565]]

the Nation, drastic drops in home values, and thousands of construction 
workers are without work. Casino workers, the backbone of our economy, 
laid off. The number of visitors flying to Las Vegas dropped 8 percent 
this past year, the largest drop in 25 years. My State needs help, and 
we need it now.
  This bill will create or save millions of jobs over the next 2 years. 
In my district, thousands of construction workers will be put back to 
work improving roads and highways, building renewable energy 
facilities, improving aging school buildings and other infrastructure. 
The bill will also provide for extended unemployment benefits for the 
over 9 percent of my workforce out of work.
  The bill will also provide extended unemployment benefits for the 9 
percent of the workforce out of work and provide needed money for 
medicaid to provide health care to the neediest among us.
  Ninety-five percent of our fellow citizens will get a tax cut.
  Nevada and our country need the jobs and other support provided by 
this bill. I urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 1.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).
  Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, it is a sad day for the United States Congress. People 
are hurting throughout this entire economy. And instead of bringing a 
bill that would stimulate our economy, what we see before us is a bill 
that will simply stimulate big government.
  You know, most Americans, Mr. Chairman, believe that the reason that 
we are in the problem economy that we have is because as a Nation we 
borrowed and spent too much. And, instead, we have a bill theoretically 
to solve our problem that borrows and spends too much. You cannot 
borrow and spend your way into prosperity.
  Now, Mr. Chairman, if we were all Keynesians, and I assure you I am 
not, but if we were, all government spending is not created equal. The 
Keynesians would tell you. You look at this bill, 4 percent of this is 
spent on what most economists would call infrastructure, our roads and 
bridges.
  We need tax relief for small businesses. We need tax relief for 
American families. And we need to do it in a way that doesn't send the 
bill to future generations. The tax relief for small businesses is as 
miniscule, less than 2 percent.

                              {time}  1800

  Instead, what we have is over half of this bill is to inflate big 
government. We have $50 million for the National Endowment for the 
Arts, $726 million for an after-school snack program, office furniture 
for the Public Health Service, $1 billion for the Census.
  Mr. Chairman, the list goes on and on and on. And what we have is a 
bill that when you add the debt service is $1.2 trillion.
  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman, I would like to yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Davis), a new member of the committee, but 
a seasoned legislator.
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. I want to thank the chairman for yielding.
  I rise in strong support of this legislation, and I do so because it 
appears to me that it's actually tailor-made for my district and 
tailor-made for areas throughout the country. Most impressive about it 
for me is the fact that it provides the assistance to those at the very 
bottom of the socioeconomic scale, dislocated workers, individuals who 
have lost their jobs and individuals who are unemployed, money to 
assist States with their Medicaid deals, individuals who without it 
wouldn't know where to turn, wouldn't know what to do. It's interesting 
to hear about great giveaways. But do you know that what is a giveaway 
for some is a need for others?
  There has never been more need for this legislation than right now. I 
commend Chairman Rangel and all of the other chairpersons who have 
worked on it. It's a great piece of legislation. I will proudly vote 
for it.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New York has 2 minutes remaining. The 
gentleman from California has 64\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I will be yielding time, Mr. Chairman, to 
others, so I will reserve my time for now.
  Mr. RANGEL. I would like to yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Nye), and commend him for his hard work to expand the 
work opportunity to encourage business to hire our beloved veterans.
  Mr. NYE. I thank the chairman for his leadership and for giving me 
the opportunity to work with him to make sure that our veterans and our 
small businesses are included in this economic recovery package.
  Mr. Chairman, helping businesses hire veterans makes good economic 
sense. That is why I strongly support the provision of this bill that 
would give substantial tax credits to businesses that hire unemployed 
veterans.
  This proposal will reduce taxes for small businesses. It will bring 
more highly-trained workers into the workforce. And perhaps most 
importantly, it will help us keep faith with the men and women who have 
served our country in uniform.
  In my home district, the Second District of Virginia, we're home to 
the largest population of military personnel and veterans in the 
country. And as the people of Hampton Roads can tell you, an investment 
in our veterans and small businesses is a responsible investment in our 
economy and a wise investment for our future.
  I thank Chairman Rangel for his leadership. I know he shares my 
commitment to standing up for all of our veterans, and I look forward 
to working with him on this issue as we continue to rebuild our 
economy.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, in order to ask a question, 
let me yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).
  Mr. HENSARLING. I thank the gentleman. I listened to the gentleman 
from Virginia carefully, and I'm curious. I would be happy to yield 
time to him.
  When he talks about provisions that make economic sense, could he 
explain how $50 million to the National Endowment for the Arts makes 
economic sense for his congressional district? I would be happy to 
yield to the gentleman.
  Mr. OBEY. I would be happy to respond to that if the gentleman wants 
to yield to me.
  Mr. HENSARLING. The gentleman from Virginia was the one who spoke. So 
I'm happy to yield time to him. I see the gentleman is not interested 
in answering the question.
  Mr. OBEY. I will be happy to respond to the gentleman if he wants, 
since I am responsible for the money in the bill.
  Mr. HENSARLING. Well, I appreciate the offer of the chairman. But I 
have plenty of opportunities to speak with him.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New York has 1 minute remaining.
  Mr. RANGEL. Well, this could be one of the roughest times our great 
Nation has faced economically, but I think that history is going to 
recall this as one of the proudest moments that our Congress would be 
involved in. No, we're not taking care of banks or fiscal institutions 
or those who buy the jets. But we are taking care of our middle class. 
That is the heart of America. That is what pumps our economy. And that 
is why we're trying to help them by expanding their disposable income, 
helping the working families with kids, helping our veterans who are 
unemployed, bringing some relief to those who feel the pain yet are 
looking toward the future for new economies to make this a greener 
America, getting involved in high tech and helping people out with 
health.
  In the final analysis, besides the flag, what makes us so great is 
that this country is going to be healthy, educated and competitive. And 
at the end of the day, it will be recalled that, yes, we got hit hard 
economically, but the strong middle class and this United States House 
of Representatives came forward, and we saved our country and we saved 
our economy.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Linder).
  Mr. LINDER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. Chairman, we have all heard the proverb that if you give a man a 
fish, he can eat for a day. If you teach him to fish, he can eat for a 
lifetime. This bill is full of fish going to deserving people to eat 
for 1 day. There is nothing in here for fishing rods. There is nothing 
in here for training.

[[Page H566]]

  To get out of the slump, we need to get people who are unemployed 
employed in real jobs with real companies. We have the second highest 
tax on corporations in the world. Lowering that tax burden would help 
get people hired. To hire people, most of whom will be hired by small 
businesses, the owner of that business needs a predictable future. This 
gives him none of that.
  The other side is very proud to say that 95 percent are going to get 
a tax cut. But that tax cut means a refundable tax credit for people 
who do not pay taxes. Today, 15 million people get their income tax 
rebated plus a payroll tax plus more from the taxpayer.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from California (Mr. Waxman) is now 
controlling 15 minutes.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Members of Congress and those who are watching our deliberations 
today, this is an important bill. We have 7 percent of the country 
unemployed, and that number is going up. So in this legislation, we are 
trying to put funds to help people get jobs and move our economy to a 
stronger position.
  The Committee on Energy and Commerce has three important areas where 
we have made a contribution to this legislation. We have investments in 
building out a new broadband infrastructure. This will allow rural and 
other underserved areas to join the global economy. This legislation 
also provides $27 billion to accelerate deployment of smart grid 
technology, fund energy efficiency investments and establish a new loan 
guarantee program for renewable energy. These will provide new jobs. 
They will reduce our dependence on foreign oil. And they will protect 
our environment.
  This bill contains important health provisions. The bill will help 
those people who lose their jobs by providing temporary health 
insurance. We do this in two ways. The COBRA program, which allows 
people to keep their insurance from their former employer, will be 
subsidized for those who want to hold on to that private insurance. It 
will also have a component to provide funds under the Medicaid program 
to cover the unemployed Americans who do not have COBRA coverage. 
Secondly, the bill would accelerate the nationwide adoption of health 
information technology. This investment will create high tech jobs, 
reduce medical errors and improve care. And thirdly, the bill will 
provide a temporary boost for State Medicaid programs facing surges in 
caseloads at the same time that the State has fewer resources in 
revenues. This is called the FMAP, the Federal Medicaid Assistance 
Program, and it would provide additional funds for States with 
particularly high unemployment.
  In this bill, when it was reported out of committee, we had a 
sensible provision to allow low-income women better access to family 
planning services, one of the most important preventive health services 
we can provide. It also would allow women to stay in the workforce. 
Unfortunately, this provision has generated a firestorm of 
misinformation and unfounded criticism from the Republican members. I 
have spoken to President Obama about this provision. He strongly 
supports this cost-saving policy. He is committed, as I am, to seeing 
this provision become law. But we don't want this provision to become a 
distraction from the other legislation.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. WAXMAN. I yield myself an additional 20 seconds.
  So in order to keep the spotlight focused on the important task at 
hand, this provision will be removed from the bill. We will get it into 
the law in some other legislation later in the year.
  We in this bill have an important down payment on programs that lead 
us in the right direction.
  I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 1.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I proudly yield 2 minutes to 
the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Burton).
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank my good buddy for yielding.
  Margaret Thatcher, the former Prime Minister of England, said that 
the problem with socialism is you eventually run out of somebody else's 
money. And what I'm concerned about here is not just the money we're 
spending today. We have spent $700 billion on the Wall Street bailout, 
and we don't know where most of that money has gone. Now we're going to 
put another $835 billion into this so-called economic stimulus bill.
  President Obama said on January 16 that this plan is a significant 
down payment on our most urgent challenges. Vice President Biden said 
last Sunday that Timothy Geithner, the Treasury Secretary, will soon 
recommend to President Obama whether more money is needed beyond the 
$700 billion allocated to American banks. Lawrence Summers, the top 
economic adviser to the President, said that the government can't 
afford to spend more than $1 trillion to boost the economy and save 
financial institutions.
  My question is, where does it end? We're printing so much money and 
we're going to spend so much money that we're going to put this whole 
country and our future generations into a deep hole which will lead us, 
in my opinion, to government control and socialism.
  The thing that has made this country great is the free enterprise 
system and private enterprise and private individuals making a profit, 
creating jobs and making the economy flourish. What we're doing is 
we're turning this whole economy over to the government with more and 
more and more spending. And what we're doing today is just the 
beginning. We're talking about $2 trillion, $3 trillion, $4 trillion 
more down the road, and we can't afford it. We can't afford the 
inflation, and we certainly can't afford socialism and more government 
control.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased at this time to yield 1 minute 
to the very distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Space), a new member 
of our committee who has played a very constructive and important role 
in the development of this bill.
  Mr. SPACE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to support the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act, and I would like to thank Chairman 
Waxman and the leadership for including funds in this bill for improved 
access to rural broadband. Put differently, it recognizes the 
importance of access to high-speed Internet technology for all 
communities, regardless of affluence or location.
  This bill will help bridge the divide between rural America and urban 
and suburban America when it comes to access not only to technology, 
but what technology brings; better educational opportunities, better 
health-care related opportunities and certainly better economic 
development opportunities.
  What we're saying in this bill is something that I have known for a 
long time. High speed Internet access is not a luxury. It is a 
necessity. And what we're saying with this bill today and with the 
allocation of these funds for rural broadband is that our rural 
communities will no longer be left behind and no longer be relegated to 
the sidelines of advancing technology.
  Today is not a small step. It is a massive leap that will bring 
hundreds of thousands of Americans in Appalachian Ohio and in other 
underserved areas into the new century.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to yield 1\1/2\ 
minutes to the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. Fortenberry).

                              {time}  1815

  Mr. FORTENBERRY. Mr. Chair, I do not want to see any family face 
unemployment or foreclosure, or any business experience a downturn, but 
I fear we are suffering from a tyranny of worn-out ideas here.
  This bill is called a stimulus bill, but I believe it is an 
unsustainable spending bill.
  Mr. Chairman, when did we decide that more Federal spending in itself 
is economic stimulus? Since 2000, we have increased spending by about 
60 percent in this country and the national debt has nearly doubled. 
Despite these growing expenditures, our economy has worsened, and we 
are left with an $11 trillion debt. And now we have a proposal that is 
before us that would be the largest spending bill in the United States 
history, and no plan to pay for it.
  Will we continue to rely on foreign nations, such as China, already 
bankrolling our spending habits? Or just defer responsibility to our 
children

[[Page H567]]

and our grandchildren and future generations? We are delaying tough 
choices and we are pushing reality down the road here. Much of this 
assistance goes to subsidizing States. Some States, like Nebraska, have 
thus far managed their budgets responsibly, even in tough times. I 
won't ask Nebraskans to pay for poor governance elsewhere.
  Mr. Chair, I don't want to give a speech simply to oppose. There are 
some important, new bold ideas here, such as alternative energy for a 
sustainable energy future, a modern electrical grid and health 
information technology. But the entirety of the package puts us on a 
path of aggressive spending, in the name of stimulus, that will be 
nearly impossible to reverse.
  Mr. WAXMAN. Mr. Chairman, I ask that the balance of our time be 
managed by the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pallone).
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Altmire). Without objection, the gentleman from 
New Jersey will control the time.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Last year, 2.6 million jobs were lost, and on Monday alone four 
American companies announced that they were laying off 37,000 
employees. When workers lose their jobs, many also lose their health 
insurance. And for those lucky enough to keep their coverage, many end 
up delaying medical care because they choose to use their limited 
resources on groceries and other basic necessities. These families need 
help, and they will get it from this economic recovery package.
  This bill makes important improvements to COBRA coverage so it is 
more affordable for workers who have been laid off. In addition, for 
those workers who have lost their job but are not eligible for COBRA 
coverage, the bill creates a new temporary Medicaid option that will be 
paid for entirely by the Federal Government. Combined, these provisions 
will help provide health coverage to over 8 million Americans over the 
next year.
  In addition, this bill will provide States with urgent fiscal relief. 
Right now, almost every State is experiencing a budget crisis. 
Governors are struggling to find ways to close these budget gaps, and 
many governors are starting to look at scaling back on their Medicaid 
programs, just as more and more people are in need of Medicaid 
services.
  This bill provides critical financial assistance so States are not 
forced to scale back their Medicaid programs and can continue to serve 
those in need.
  We also make a significant investment in our economic future by 
investing $20 billion to help doctors and hospitals acquire and use 
health information technology. For years we have all been talking about 
the need to modernize our health care system, and this bill finally 
provides the means to do so. Not only does this legislation invest in 
our economy today, but it also makes our health care system safer and 
more efficient for years to come.
  The recovery package answers the pleas from economists who said that 
we must act quickly and boldly, and it certainly deserves bipartisan 
support.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
  Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished 
ranking member for yielding me this time, and I do rise, unfortunately, 
in opposition to H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 
2009, the so-called stimulus package.
  Mr. Chairman, we spent 12 hours in the Energy and Commerce Committee 
marking our portion of this bill up last week, and a few, a very few 
Republican amendments were approved and summarily stripped out as we 
see this new bill before us today.
  But it is not really process that is my objection, it is just that I 
have a great fear that instead of throwing water on a fire, as it has 
been described, this economic problem that we have, we are about to 
throw kerosene on the fire and make the matter a lot worse. We tried to 
explain that to President Obama when he visited our conference today, 
and we want him to show some changes in the bill that we Republicans 
can accept, like more tax breaks for small businesses and entrepreneurs 
who create jobs.
  I regretfully oppose the bill.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Washington (Mr. Inslee).
  (Mr. INSLEE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. INSLEE. Mr. Chairman, we are not launching just a stimulus 
package here, we are launching a new, clean energy rocket. We know how 
to launch revolutions in technology. We did it in the original Apollo 
project that started right in this Chamber when John F. Kennedy 
launched that project standing right behind me. In this bill today, we 
are launching a similarly ambitious and similarly important clean 
energy revolution.
  The reason I say that is the next few years, when hundreds of people 
go to work building lithium-ion batteries for our advanced electric 
cars, like at the A123 Battery Company in Massachusetts, it is because 
of this bill. When hundreds of people go to work doing advanced 
photovoltaic panels, like at Nanosolar, a thin-film photovoltaic 
company in California, it is going to be because of this bill. When 
hundreds of people go to work making gasoline out of algae, like they 
are doing in the deserts of Nevada, it is because of this bill. We are 
launching a rocket, a revolution, today.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 
minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. Nunes), a member of the 
Ways and Means Committee.
  Mr. NUNES. Mr. Chairman, the significance of what we face can only be 
described as a generational challenge. Many of my colleagues seem to 
believe that the only solution is to spend enormous amounts of taxpayer 
money.
  First we are told that we had to spend $700 billion to bail out Wall 
Street. Then we were told that, despite the bailout's failure, we 
needed another $350 billion. And now this Congress is told to approve 
nearly $1 trillion in a taxpayer-funded giveaway.
  Mr. Chairman, perhaps it is time to remind my colleagues that this 
Nation is already facing unsustainable levels of government spending. 
Responsible action today is not to spend more, but to reform the way we 
do business and spend less. The current economic crisis should serve as 
a warning, a powerful warning to this Congress: face your economic 
demons, or be crushed by your political cowardice.
  For years we have lived on borrowed time. We have continued to throw 
money at unsustainable and broken programs like Social Security, 
Medicare and Medicaid. These programs must be fixed.
  On a more blunt point, our Nation's energy policy is an absolute 
travesty. To put it simply, our policies are bizarre. We want abundant 
energy, but we enact policies that do nothing but march us in the 
opposite direction.
  It is time for this Congress to face reality. We should permit more 
oil development off Alaska and our coastlines. I know this is shocking 
to hear, but we must also match the leadership of France and produce 80 
percent of our electricity from nuclear reactors.
  The bottom line is we need jobs. Energy development will create jobs. 
I can assure you that throwing more and more money at the problem isn't 
going to solve the crisis. Simply taking action to be seen as doing 
something is denying reality and is an injustice to the American 
people.
  Tough choices need to be made. While they will not always be popular, 
nor will they be easy, they are most certainly necessary.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Massachusetts, the chairman of the Environment and Energy Subcommittee, 
Mr. Markey.
  Mr. MARKEY of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman.
  This urgently-needed stimulus bill funds infrastructure projects that 
are shovel-ready, while also supporting future-oriented projects that 
are circuit-ready: broadband, electronic medical records, smart grid, 
advanced battery technologies, and other vital priorities.
  This package is a major downpayment on the clean, renewable energy 
future this country has been waiting for and desperately needs.
  But this legislation should not be characterized by what we spend, 
but

[[Page H568]]

rather by what we save. These smart, clean energy investments will save 
jobs, ensuring that windmills and solar panels are built here at home. 
It will save energy through efficiency measures on schools and 
buildings, and it will save consumers and businesses money on their 
heating, gas and energy bills.
  With the support included in this package, wind capacity will grow 
from 25,000 megawatts today to 44,000 megawatts generated on a daily 
basis in 2012. At 220 tons of steel per wind turbine, that is nearly 3 
million tons of new steel demands. Those steel jobs are blue collar 
jobs tinted green by the force of the clean energy revolution.
  The massive investments in weatherization, State energy efficiency 
grants, and Federal building efficiency are some of the safest and 
smartest investments our country can make right now. They put money 
into the pockets of American workers and pay for themselves in the form 
of energy savings and lower energy prices.
  This energy efficiency double dividend is a proven, reliable 
phenomenon that our current weak economy must exploit. Working smarter, 
not harder, that is what this bill is all about.
  The bill provides $20 billion in new health IT infrastructure to 
improve care, lower costs and reduce medical efforts. I am pleased that 
the bill includes patient privacy safeguards that I have long 
advocated, including a provision that I offered at the Energy and 
Commerce Committee markup to ensure that patients' medical records are 
made unreadable to unauthorized individuals. This was supported by 
Chairman Waxman and Ranking Member Barton. This is an issue that we all 
agree on, the privacy and security of our medical records.
  Today we have before us a balanced, well-thought out package that 
provides tax relief for 95 percent of Americans and targets investments 
in key areas to turn around the American economy. I strongly support 
these measures and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 
minutes to my colleague from Indiana, Mr. Buyer.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chairman, in December as then President-elect Obama 
was putting together his transition team, I turned to the staff on the 
House Veterans' Affairs Committee on the Republican side and said I do 
appreciate Mr. Obama's tone for bipartisanship, and I instructed the 
staff to look at all of the construction projects and work with the 
Bush administration. We sent a letter then to not only Speaker Pelosi 
but also President-elect Obama. We asked for two things, in essence. 
What I sought to do was complement then President-elect Obama with 
regard to the extension of his hand in bipartisanship.
  My letter asked to include veterans in the stimulus plan, and to do 
two things. Since my Democrat colleagues love to do public works, we 
would do that for them. We would do public works, and we will also do 
job creation and entrepreneurship to satisfy Republicans. We would be 
bipartisan in regard to our letter to the transition team and to the 
Speaker of the House.
  Well, what do you think happened? My gesture was half met. So as the 
ranking Republican on Veterans' Affairs, I asked for a billion dollars 
with regard to $950 million for hospital nonrecurring maintenance, i.e. 
construction, and then $500 million for cemeteries, recurring 
maintenance, and then a billion dollars for small business loan 
guarantees.
  Oh, we are not going to take creation of jobs and entrepreneurship. 
That was rejected. What they took were the public works side. Let's 
create jobs. Well, excuse me, strike that. We are going to create work. 
See, there is a difference between creation of work and creation of a 
job.
  So what I am hopeful is here, I have gone to the Rules Committee and 
I have offered four amendments to the Rules Committee, and I am hopeful 
that they will adopt this. Entrepreneurship is important.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman's time has expired.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. I yield an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Chair, the balance of my remarks I submit for the 
Record.
  Mr. Chair, today, the headline in the State's largest newspaper noted 
an additional 50,000 job losses across the country. Indiana's 
unemployment rate jumped a full 1% last month to 8.2%. Hoosiers are 
worried about their economic future, wondering if they can afford to 
send their kids to college or afford retirement.
  The stimulus bill being rammed through Congress is not the medicine 
to meet the economic challenges we face in the short term or the long 
term. Business owners, workers and employers tell me they believe we 
need a short term stimulus to get the economy moving again, real tools 
to help them stay solvent.
  However, the bill before us is a political tool geared more toward 
2012 than 2009. Very little of this stimulus bill will do anything to 
grow the economy or expand our job base. Not to mention the cost on 
future generations. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), 
the federal deficit will rise to a record $1.2 trillion in 2009, and 
that does not even include the near $1 trillion included in this 
massive spending bill.
  Most of the discretionary spending in this bill will not actually be 
spent until after 2010--only 8% of the spending will take place this 
year.
  This legislation alone increases the national debt by $6,700 for 
every American household. It doles out enough money to give every man, 
woman and child in the nation $2,700 each. How can I explain that as 
responsible and rational government spending to the Hoosiers that I 
represent back home in Indiana?
  This is only the first shot. Watch out America. The increased debt 
caused by this legislation will be used as a further rationale for 
raising taxes and continued government spending in the future.
  The Federal Government cannot spend its way out of this recession. 
History tells us that to expand the economy the private sector must 
grow. We need to pass policies that promote growth and economic 
expansion, not policies that give handouts. Instead of a handout, we 
must give Americans a hand through short-term stimulus and long-term 
tax policies which will allow the real job makers--the private sector--
to grow our economy.
  This legislation is not the appropriate means to revitalize the 
economy. Instead of creating higher taxes for American families by 
increasing government spending, we should make permanent the 2001 and 
2003 tax reductions and reduce individual, small business and corporate 
taxes. Extending these tax cuts and further reducing taxes would 
stimulate long-term job production and increase the gross domestic 
product, thereby improving our economy and shortening the length of the 
recession. This bill creates a lot of work, not the desperately needed 
jobs that help bolster the long term growth of this Nation's economy.

                              {time}  1830

  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Illinois (Ms. Schakowsky).
  Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. I thank you for yielding.
  I rise today in strong support of the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Plan and to give you just 10 of the many good reasons to 
support this particular bill.
  One, it will save and create three to four million jobs;
  Two, it provides a critical boost in Medicaid assistance to States so 
that budget shortfalls don't harm access to health care;
  Three, it will help those who lose their jobs maintain health 
insurance;
  Four, it invests in renewable energy technologies and research;
  Five, it provides a 100 percent increase in weatherization funding to 
help make homes and businesses energy efficient;
  Six, it extends unemployment insurance coverage through the end of 
the year and increases the benefit by $25 a week;
  Seven, it increases the maximum Pell Grant to help more people go to 
college;
  Eight, it helps rebuild our schools and gives them financial support;
  Nine, it increases funding for affordable housing and homelessness 
prevention programs;
  Ten, it will give a tax credit to 95 percent of American workers, a 
credit worth up to $1,000.
  This is a good bill, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Neugebauer).
  Mr. NEUGEBAUER. I thank the gentleman.
  This debate is really about two dollars. This is the dollar that's in 
the hands of the American people tonight, and this is the dollar, what 
it looks like when we give it to the Federal Government. You know, it 
shrinks because we don't spend it wisely.

[[Page H569]]

  Tonight we're being asked to consider a bill for $825 billion. And 
you know what? We don't have $825 billion. You know what we're going to 
have to do? We're going to have to print these. And guess what? In 
order to issue them, we're going to have to borrow the money from 
countries like China.
  The question is, are we going to try and spend and borrow our way out 
of this economic downturn? The American people know that's not the 
answer. They also know that it's better for them to invest this dollar 
in the American economy than let the Federal Government go spend this 
dollar in our economy.
  Mr. Chair, I'm disappointed that we are considering a bill tonight 
that's almost equal to the entire discretionary budget that would 
normally go through the appropriation process. Oh, no, we didn't go 
through any process, we were brought a bill and said this is what we 
should do.
  The American people want us to leave this dollar in their pocket.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Altmire).
  Mr. ALTMIRE. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, today this House will vote on the largest economic 
recovery package in this Nation's history. After weeks of discussion 
and debate, we have come to a compromise bill that incorporates 
different points of view and makes the necessary hard choices.
  Funding in this bill rebuilds crumbling roads and bridges, locks and 
dams, it improves security on our borders and our ports, it repairs and 
maintains our VA and DOD health facilities, modernizes our schools, 
laboratories and classrooms. But, most important, this economic 
recovery package will put people back to work and put money back in 
their pockets with a tax cut for 95 percent of working families in 
America. It will create jobs, get the economy moving again, and leave 
this country with items of lasting significance to show for it.
  Mr. Chairman, we simply cannot wait any longer to help our economy 
and get this country moving again. Passage of this bill is a necessary 
step in that direction.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, could I inquire as to the 
amount of time that's remaining?
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from California has 53\1/2\ minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. LEWIS of California. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to H. Res. 88, I 
yield the balance of my time to the ranking member of the Ways and 
Means Committee, Mr. Camp.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Michigan will control the balance of 
the time.
  Mr. CAMP. At this time, Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the 
distinguished ranking member of the House Budget Committee and member 
of the Ways and Means Committee, Mr. Ryan of Wisconsin.
  Mr. RYAN of Wisconsin. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, we can do better than this. We're losing tens of 
thousands of jobs a week in this economy. This is the worst recession 
we've seen in generations. And what are we about to vote on? We are 
about to vote on a trillion dollar spending package--yes, a trillion 
dollars, because the Congressional Budget Office just told us today 
just to pay for the interest on this bill is another $350 billion. 
We're going to vote on a trillion dollar spending package that amounts 
to basically a spending wish list for all the special interest groups 
out there. In fact, for those who are into all of this spending, half 
of the spending doesn't even occur for 2 more years. But the spending 
that occurs quickly are things like $15 million for the National 
Endowment for the Arts, $6 billion for arts and culture, $600 million 
to buy new cars for Federal employees. Is this the way toward 
prosperity? Toward jobs?
  I want you to take a look at the tax policy in this bill. The big 
idea is let's give everybody a rebate that's 10 bucks a week per 
individual or a whopping $20 a week for couples. Do you really think 
that's going to turn this economy around?
  2.7 percent of this bill is aimed at encouraging businesses to retain 
and create jobs; 2.7 percent of this entire $1 trillion bill to help 
businesses create jobs. I think we need a little more than that. We 
need to help the small businesses, the self-employed, the entrepreneurs 
get out there and create jobs. We had a major manufacturer in the 
Midwest just announce 20,000 layoffs yesterday. There is hardly 
anything in this bill that will do anything to help those manufacturers 
get those jobs back.
  What's worse is that after we go on this spending binge, this will 
lead to higher taxes. The Congressional Budget Office is saying we're 
going to have the highest unemployment we've seen in 25 years for the 
next 4 years. And what this bill will do is it will lead us to higher 
taxes; higher taxes on small businesses, higher taxes on capital, 
higher taxes on investment, on our savings portfolios, on our 
retirement, on our college savings plans. That's what is in store right 
around the corner at the end of next year.
  My fear is this: we need to come together with an economic rescue 
package that actually helps the economy. This bill is not worthy of our 
new President's signature. We can do better than this. This is not 
something that should come to the floor. I understand the majority can 
do as they please. They can shut the minority out--and that's fine, 
they did that, and that is their choice and their prerogative--but what 
really matters is whether this creates jobs, and it doesn't.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Scott).
  Mr. SCOTT of Georgia. Mr. Chairman, let me just take up where my good 
friend from the other side left off. I take great umbrage with what he 
has said.
  This is a very good measure that is timed for this extraordinary time 
that we're in now. We are in the worst economic crisis in the history 
of this country, many say since the Depression. But from what I 
understand, at the rate of losing 6,000 homes to foreclosures every 
day, we're losing 7,200 jobs every day since the beginning of this 
year, there has been nothing like that in the history of this country. 
The American people are expecting us to act and move with boldness, 
with confidence, not whining, not saying, oh, woe is me.
  Now, Mr. Chairman, let me tell you that these are, indeed, the times 
that try men's souls. In the history of this country we've had those 
moments. When the history is written on this moment, what do we want 
them to say about what the Congress did when we faced the greatest 
economic crisis of our time? Do we want to say we whined and said no 
and did nothing? Or do they want to see where we did the practical 
thing of stimulating the economy by investing in its infrastructure, in 
its schools, in its health care, that not only creates jobs, but 
creates wealth and gets our economy well?
  And, yes, we understand there's another way to stimulate the economy 
through selective tax cuts, but Mr. Chairman, those tax cuts needed to 
be targeted down at the level of the people at the lower incomes and 
the middle incomes that are going to be most likely to spend the money.
  Now, Mr. Chairman, we've taken care of the banks; let's take care of 
the American people and pass this measure.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished member 
of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Herger).
  Mr. HERGER. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong opposition to this bill 
with the firm belief and hope that we can do better.
  We are currently undergoing a severe economic downturn. My own State 
and district have been badly impacted. And I share our new President's 
desire to move quickly on an economic recovery measure. However, I 
cannot support a bill that claims to provide $275 billion in tax relief 
when $80 billion of that is going to people with no income tax 
liability. You can't cut taxes for someone who doesn't pay taxes. Mr. 
Chairman, we can do better by focusing on tax relief that creates 
incentives for economic activity.
  Nor can I support a bill that spends hundreds of billions on big 
government programs like the National Endowment for the Arts or new 
cars for Federal workers. We do need to make long-term investments in 
infrastructure and health information technology, but long-term 
investments require careful planning. We can do better by taking

[[Page H570]]

the time to get infrastructure and health IT right, and by eliminating 
wasteful spending.
  Nor can I support a bill that would lead employers to cut jobs or 
drop health coverage in the middle of a recession. Allowing workers to 
stay on COBRA longer--more than 30 years in some cases--could impose an 
unfunded mandate on employers of $40 billion or more. In the Ways and 
Means Committee, the majority refused even to study the effect of this 
provision on coverage. We can do better by expanding eligibility for 
health insurance tax relief, and by providing more funding for high-
risk pools for those who can't get coverage elsewhere.
  Finally, I can't support an $825 billion bill that won't fully take 
effect until 18 months or 2 years down the road, or even longer. Mr. 
Chairman, people in my district need help today. We can do better by 
passing fast-acting tax relief that will create jobs this year, plus 
extended unemployment benefits for those out of work.
  I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' Mr. Chairman, we can and must do 
better.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from New Jersey has 30 seconds remaining.
  Mr. PALLONE. I would yield that remaining time to Mr. Obey.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMP. At this time, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished member 
of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady).
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I know that our new President is sincere in 
trying to get the economy moving. Unfortunately, I think the only 
winners in this bill are the special interests who are swarming the 
Capitol looking for their piece of the pie. And the losers will be the 
American taxpayers, who ultimately are going to see their taxes 
increased to pay for all this spending. There's a right way to spur the 
economy. This isn't it. And again, it will lead to higher tax 
increases.
  Proponents claim that this will help spur demand for families, but 
the average worker will only take home an extra $1.35 a day. I can't 
imagine them rushing to the mall with that small of a windfall. This is 
supposed to help small businesses create jobs, but in truth, there's 
more money allocated to buy new art in America than there is to help 
small businesses expense new equipment and computers.
  This is designed to create jobs, but each job would cost $225,000 to 
create a smaller $50,000 job. This is supposed to be about 
infrastructure, but only about a tiny part, 3\1/2\ percent, will go to 
new roads. And school construction is just a tiny part of a massive 
education bill. And what's frustrating is there is no free money, there 
is no free money in Washington; someone sometime is going to have to 
pay for this. And at a time when we are seeing record debt, the highest 
debt in peacetime since 1930, it is the American public who ultimately 
will have to pay this bill.
  To put it in perspective so that every taxpayer understands, the cost 
of this measure is equal to doubling all the income taxes every 
American pays for 1 year; not just the wealthy, not just the middle 
class, every taxpayer would have to double their taxes in order to pay 
for this spending spree.
  Mr. President, I would urge you to veto this bill. It is not targeted 
or timely. It is not an era of new responsibility. This is a tax 
increase, a stimulus that will fail, unfortunately, and we have a 
better idea.

                              {time}  1845

  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to 
the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis) for the purpose of entering 
into a colloquy.
  Mr. POLIS of Colorado. Mr. Chairman, I would like to engage Chairman 
Miller in a colloquy for purposes of illuminating the intent of the job 
training and worker diversification provisions of H.R. 1, the Economic 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009.
  Earlier in the month, I, along with 12 of my colleagues, sent a 
letter to then President-elect Obama seeking to promote gender equity 
in the infrastructure job creation spurred by the economic recovery 
funding. With women holding less than 10 percent of construction jobs, 
the letter asked for additional funding for the Department of Labor 
program known as WANTO, which trains women for higher-wage 
nontraditional jobs, and to strengthen the Office of Federal Contract 
Compliance Programs so it can effectively enforce current laws that 
require contractors to reach out and recruit women into jobs in which 
they're underrepresented.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. If the gentleman would yield, I want 
to say to the gentleman I share your concern that women receive equal 
opportunity to be trained and hired in the types of higher-paid 
positions that are traditionally occupied by men. The bill provides 
approximately $4 billion to train workers who need new or additional 
skills. Job training to train women in nontraditional job retains its 
priority recognition as under current law.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman 
an additional 30 seconds.
  The bill also provides $80 million to enhance worker protections on 
those jobs including through the Office of Federal Contract Compliance, 
Health and Safety, and wage and hour enforcement.
  Mr. POLIS of Colorado. I thank the chairman for his explanation. I 
appreciate the consideration that this Chamber has given to improving 
the protections and opportunities afforded to women seeking to take 
care of their families in this very challenging economic time.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes at this time to the 
distinguished gentleman of the Ways and Means Committee from Washington 
State (Mr. Reichert).
  Mr. REICHERT. Mr. Chairman, just last week the Joint Committee on 
Taxation could not say whether any jobs would be created by the nearly 
$1 trillion package before us.
  We cannot let calls for swift action overrun common sense, thorough 
consideration, and healthy debate. The bailout showed us the mistakes 
that can happen when government rushes to action.
  We are united, however, Democrats and Republicans, together in 
recognizing the need for action. This is a time for smart, accountable, 
and targeted investments to get our economy back on track, not more of 
the same shotgun spending that mortgages our children's futures.
  There are clearly provisions in this bill that I support and I think 
every Member in the House has something in this bill they support. But 
we are here to pass an emergency stimulus package that creates jobs, 
not another spending bill.
  To stimulate the economy and preserve, promote, and create jobs, we 
must enact proven measures like broad-based tax relief for families and 
small businesses, opening new markets to trade, and investing wisely in 
infrastructure. Those are the things that will get our economy moving 
and create jobs for people in our Nation.
  So I urge my colleagues to oppose this measure so that we can work 
together with President Obama, who has reached out to the Republican 
side and encouraged us to provide our input, our ideas, and our 
thoughts to craft effective legislation that gets our economy back on 
track.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to 
the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the legislation.
  Our economy is falling apart. We have millions of people out of work. 
We have millions of people who are out of work that don't even have 
unemployment benefits anymore. We have got to respond to the immediate 
needs of the American people.
  I don't agree with everything in this legislation, but I know one 
thing: If we don't move quickly to try to take steps to stimulate this 
economy, we are only going to go down faster. I see this legislation as 
being an appropriate first step that will help bring needed money and 
put it in the hands of the American people.
  We're going to have to do more, though. I have bills to create a 
universal pre-kindergarten program that will help American families 
relieve a lot of financial burden; a bill with John Conyers to create a 
not-for-profit health care system, universal health care, that will 
solve a major problem for business and industry and give all Americans 
health care.

[[Page H571]]

  Congress must make a beginning. That's what we were elected to do. We 
need to work together, Democrats and Republicans, and put aside our 
differences on some of the issues that are in this package in order to 
look for the higher good of the American people.
  The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield the gentleman 
an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. KUCINICH. So I would say to my colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle, we see things in this package we don't like. We don't like the 
fact that some of the benefits aren't getting to people quickly enough. 
I am concerned about that as well. But the fact of the matter is we 
have to realize this is our first step, and that first step has to be 
in the direction of relieving the economic crisis for the American 
family.
  I stood with Members on the other side of the aisle in challenging 
the bailout. But it's time that we start to give benefits to the 
American people, and this legislation does that. I urge its support.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished member 
of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Louisiana, Dr. 
Boustany.
  Mr. BOUSTANY. Mr. Chairman, both sides can agree that our national 
economy is in trouble as tens of thousands of Americans are without 
work. But the question remains, are we going to get this right? The 
bill before us falls far short of the goals that we are hoping to 
achieve.
  In 2005 my home State of Louisiana saw economic devastation as the 
result of two hurricanes. During that recovery effort, we learned many 
things about what government can and can't do effectively and quickly. 
Tax relief for small businesses and families enable businesses across 
the Gulf Coast to rebuild, expand, and create good-paying, long-lasting 
jobs. As a result, thousands of Louisiana families found security they 
desperately needed following these two storms.
  Government direct spending was also attempted. However, 3 years 
later, 3 years later, much of that money is still tied up in 
bureaucratic entanglement.
  There's a lesson here. There is clearly a lesson. There are many 
different solutions to a problem, and this economic crisis, as complex 
as it is, certainly proves this. But secondly and more importantly, we 
must look for solutions that will produce results.
  We need to spur job creation to get Americans working again, and the 
best way to achieve that job creation is by reducing taxes on small 
businesses, entrepreneurs, and companies who can put people to work 
now.
  We are willing to work with the administration and with our friends 
across the aisle to accomplish these goals. Together I believe we could 
craft a bill that would stimulate private sector job growth, which is 
what's desperately needed. That will make this country competitive 
again. This bill will not accomplish those goals.
  I would urge a ``no'' vote on this bill, and let's come up with a 
better way to do this.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such 
time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman and Members of the House, I must say that I truly admire 
the courage of my friends on the other side of the aisle. In the middle 
of the worst economic downturn that any of us can remember, our parents 
told us about the Depression, an unprecedented and accelerating job 
loss all across the American economy in every sector, our friends on 
the other side of the aisle ask us just for one last time to do what 
they've been doing the last 8 years; to just one more time give the tax 
cuts to the richest people in the country; to just one more time dive 
into the tank of fiscal irresponsibility.
  They inherited a $5 trillion surplus, and they squandered it to an $8 
trillion deficit. They created the slowest job creation since World War 
II, the slowest job creation since World War II in a recovery. They 
held middle income wages stagnate. In fact, many families lost ground. 
The wealthy did the best.
  They stood by while banks created liar loans, while banks created no-
doc loans, while people on Wall Street played fast and easy with 
hardworking Americans' money in their pension plans. And what do we get 
for their 8 years? We see people now getting their returns on their 
pensions, their 401(k) plans, and 30, 40, 50 percent of their assets 
are gone and those who are over 55 living in panic about how will they 
have a retirement. And yet they stand here day after day and say just 
let us have more of what we were doing in the past.
  You know, when that helicopter took off outside here in this plaza, 
millions of Americans gave that President a wave good-bye because in 
the middle of this historic downturn, millions and millions of 
Americans made a decision to go in another direction because what you 
were doing hadn't worked for them or for their families, hadn't worked 
for them or their families, because that was your policy.
  Mr. Chairman, that was their policy, crude and rude with respect to 
working Americans in this country and their families.
  So what do we have now? We have an incredible consensus of economists 
who are on the left, who are on the right, who advised Republican 
candidates in the past, Ronald Reagan, John McCain, and they have said 
you have got to put together a recovery act where the government spends 
this money on projects to put people back to work to create jobs. It 
will not stop unemployment, but it will help. It will help. And that's 
what we're doing here. That's what we're doing here.
  They also said from the right and the left, as they told us that the 
American economy is shutting down while you're asking to do more of the 
same, they said don't forget education. We cannot have young people 
lose a year or 2 years of education because of an economic downturn. 
You must support education at the local level. Why? Because the States 
and local governments are hemorrhaging, hemorrhaging the loss of 
revenues. Because people can't afford to buy a car, they're not buying 
a car. Because home price values are dropping so fast that they're 
going in and getting their property taxes reestablished because of the 
loss of value in homes, and that's costing local governments and school 
districts money from sales tax and property tax. So we're trying to 
make sure that those students don't lose that educational opportunity.
  We see a number of students are now starting to forego college who 
are in the middle of their college education because of costs. Yes, 
we're going to increase the Pell grant so they can stay. We're going to 
give an income tax credit so they can stay in school. We're going to 
give them work opportunities on campus so they can stay in school. 
Because that's what the economists, that's what the venture capitalists 
said, that's the captains of industry said needs to be done. Don't lose 
that, because when this economy re-emerges, we need those people to be 
competitive with the rest of the world.
  Yes, we're going to help school districts and school construction so 
that young students can go to school in a cleaner, better environment, 
so they'll be connected to the latest technology, so they'll have the 
educational opportunities. And it will be a safe school. It will be a 
modern school. Yes, we're going to help them out and do that because 
they don't have the ability to do that because your economic policies 
froze municipal bonds and school bonds where people voted to impose 
taxes on themselves to improve their schools, to improve their cities. 
But the credit markets are seized; so we're trying to help them out for 
the time being until those markets unfreeze.
  And, yes, $300 billion was given to the Bush administration and 
Secretary Paulson, and so far it appears it was given without 
conditions in terms of any effort by the big banks to unfreeze the 
credit markets to lend to small businesses, to lend to families in 
need.
  Yes, we're changing policy. And we're doing it at the direction of 
the American people because the policy you gave them for 8 years was a 
disaster for them, their families, their retirements, their wages, 
their health care. They want to go in a different direction, and we 
will take them in a different direction. We will take them to job 
creation. We'll take them to better education. And, hopefully, we'll 
take them to a stronger economy on the advice, on the advice, with all 
due respect, of not the other side of the aisle, but of economists from 
the left to the right of impeccable credentials who said the

[[Page H572]]

only question about this package really is, is it large enough?


                       Announcement by the Chair

  The CHAIR. All Members are reminded to address the Chair with their 
remarks.

                              {time}  1900

  Mr. CAMP. I thank the Chair for that statement.
  At this time I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished member of the 
Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Roskam).
  Mr. ROSKAM. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  So much material and so little time. You know, we heard the President 
in his speech talking about putting aside petty recriminations, and he 
characterized that as, actually, childish arguments. And I think that 
some of the tone that I have heard tonight, we can rise above.
  You know, I find it ironic that the gentleman from California 
referred favorably, maybe for the first time in his career, the first 
time in my hearing, favorably quoting and referring to Republican 
economists as ``persuasive.'' I had never heard that from him before, 
Mr. Chairman.
  But I would like to quote from our President. In his State of the 
Union Message, he said something that I think actually brings us all 
together, it's really poignant, and I think it's beautiful. In fact, it 
says it has been risk takers, the doers, the makers of things who have 
carried us up the long rugged path towards prosperity and freedom. The 
market's power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched.
  Here we are, on the verge of the majority spending $825 billion in a 
spending plan, the likes of which we have not seen before, with only 
$40 million in tax relief for small business. When the President came 
in, he seemed surprised at those numbers, by comparison, $40 million to 
the risk takers that we all say are the economic engine that are going 
to move us into the future.
  We can do better, and I think it's incumbent upon us to take up that 
challenge.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Oberstar) is recognized 
and controls 10 minutes.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes.
  Our committee's portion, the infrastructure recovery program is 
targeted. It will be transparent and recipients will be held 
accountable, and the investments are desperately needed. The 
construction sector is suffering the highest unemployment rate of any 
industrial sector, 15.3 percent, 1.4 million construction workers out 
of a job.
  Fully implemented, as our committee proposes, we can have a million 
workers on a construction site in June of this year and generate $325 
billion in total economic activity when fully implemented, jobs that 
cannot be outsourced to other countries, using materials that are made 
in America, not outsourced beyond our shores.
  Transparency, we require reporting by every State DOT, every transit 
agency, every airport authority, every 30 days on the contract awarded, 
by contract, on the specific jobs, job description and payroll, which 
we will receive and make public through hearings that we will conduct 
30 days after the funding is allocated to the States and every 60 days 
thereafter.
  Accountability, an amendment which I expect or hope to offer tomorrow 
made in order by the Rules Committee, will have a requirement that 
funds be committed in 90 days, use it or lose it.
  I am pleased to rise in strong support of H.R. 1, the ``American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009''.
  With more than 1.4 million construction workers out of work, and the 
construction industry suffering the highest unemployment rate (15.3 
percent) of any industrial sector, this bill is urgently needed to put 
America back to work. The infrastructure investments funded by this 
bill will create good, family-wage jobs--jobs that cannot be outsourced 
to another country, because the work must be done here in the U.S. on 
our roads, bridges, transit and rail systems, airports, waterways, 
wastewater treatment facilities, and Federal buildings.
  For more than a year now, I have worked to ensure that infrastructure 
investment plays a key role in our Nation's economic recovery.
  I thank Chairman Obey for working with me in this effort. We 
consulted extensively on the transportation and infrastructure 
provisions in the bill. Although the legislation before us today does 
not include everything I had proposed, it is a very good start, and I 
am hopeful it can be improved and fine-tuned as deliberations continue.
  In December 2008, I proposed to House Leadership that the economic 
recovery legislation include at least $85 billion for transportation, 
environmental, and other public infrastructure investments. H.R. 1 
includes approximately $63 billion for these programs.
  My proposal adhered to the following six principles:
  Funds must be invested in ready-to-go projects. I believe we need an 
aggressive timetable for the use of funds, including a 90-day, ``use-
it-or-lose-it'' requirement for 50 percent of the funds, which will 
produce a ``quick hit'' that will jump-start our economy and create a 
substantial number of new construction jobs by June.
  2. Funds must be used to create green-collar jobs and invest in 
projects that decrease our dependence on foreign oil and address global 
climate change.
  3. The steel, iron, and manufactured goods required for these 
projects must be manufactured in the United States.
  4. Wherever possible, funds must be distributed by existing statutory 
formulas, with no earmarks, to expedite the flow of funds.
  5. Transparency and accountability in the use of funds must be 
achieved.
  6. States and other recipients of formula funds must maintain their 
effort in terms of current State and local investment levels.
  These principles are, in large measure, reflected in the legislation 
before us today.
  Although the use-it-or-lose-it deadline in the bill is currently set 
at 180 days, I am hopeful it can be shortened to 90 days, and I will be 
offering an amendment to do so.
  On December 18, I had a lengthy conference call with 14 State 
Secretaries of Transportation and Chief Executive Officers of public 
transit agencies. I outlined for them my 90-day, use-it-or-lose-it 
proposal, which would require them to obligate 50 percent of the funds 
allocated to them within 90 days.
  Every one of the participants on the conference call enthusiastically 
affirmed that they are ready to go within 90 days and can meet the use-
it-or-lose-it requirement.
  In another conference call earlier this month and at a Committee 
hearing last week, we were again assured that State and local grant 
recipients are proactively preparing to meet tight deadlines and will 
be able use these funds quickly.
  Despite these assurances from State and local officials, some here in 
Washington are skeptical that a 90-day deadline can be met. This 
skepticism is why the use-it-or-lose-it deadline was extended to 180 
days in last week's Appropriations Committee mark-up.
  Ninety days is a tight deadline, but that is exactly what we need.
  Business as usual is not good enough anymore. If the purpose of this 
legislation is to be achieved, then we must set tight deadlines, and 
hold everyone--from Federal agencies to State and local grant 
recipients--accountable to them.
  I firmly believe that the infrastructure funds provided by this bill 
can--with the right incentives--produce a substantial number of jobs by 
June, while also improving our deteriorating infrastructure and laying 
the foundation for our future economic growth.
  I thank Speaker Pelosi, Chairman Obey, Chairman of the Committee on 
Appropriations, and Chairman Olver, Chairman of the Subcommittee on 
Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 
Agencies, for working with me throughout the development of this 
legislation. I strongly urge your support for H.R. 1, a true investment 
in America's future.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMP. At this time I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Tim Murphy).
  Mr. TIM MURPHY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, with 11 million 
Americans out of work, we indeed should be concerned about Americans 
out of work and helping Americans to have jobs.
  Tomorrow the House will vote on a bill of some $835 billion as an 
economic stimulus and spending package. Thirty billion dollars of that 
will be for infrastructure spending for roads and bridges, some $20 
million for electronic medical reports, both worthy causes, which 
perhaps should be put into the highway section, but that's as it is. 
What's key here is are these really for American jobs?
  The electronic medical records is important because it allows 
hospitals to have their records on computers so doctors can access them 
from everywhere competently and confidently, and can help reduce 
millions of dollars of waste and deaths that occur from hospital 
errors.

[[Page H573]]

  However, in the Energy and Commerce Committee a few days ago I 
offered an amendment to say let's guarantee that the software work and 
the applications of that technology be done in America. It's too easy, 
at the stroke of a keyboard, to send electronic data across the globe 
where these software applications for hospitals could be done.
  So we put an amendment in. The chairman agreed to it. The committee 
unanimously agreed to, but, mysteriously, when the bill was printed, 
that and a few other Republican amendments were omitted.
  Tonight I was at the Rules Committee asking them to please restore 
this amendment to say if we are going to spend $20 billion to help 
American jobs, let's make sure we have a clause in this bill that helps 
American jobs.
  There's another amendment I offered too that says for construction 
and other parts of this bill let's also use that for American jobs. 
Let's not have the same mistake that occurred when we approved building 
a fence line at the border with Mexico, and it turned out it was done 
using a loophole with Chinese steel. Our concrete, our rebar, the cars 
that are going to be bought supposedly with this bill ought to be made 
in America.
  From the iron mines to the manufacturers, to the mills, let's use it 
to buy America. Let's return those amendments to this bill. If we 
really are going to be serious about American jobs, let's make this 
American jobs.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished 
Chair of the Surface Transportation Subcommittee, the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. DeFazio).
  Mr. DeFAZIO. I thank the gentleman.
  For 8 long years our Republican colleagues stood shoulder-to-shoulder 
with George Bush as our country accelerated its slide toward a third 
world infrastructure. The collapse of the bridge in Minnesota is 
perhaps the signal moment of the Bush administration. What did they do 
before and what have they done after for our infrastructure? Nothing.
  They didn't believe in investing in our public infrastructure. Tax 
cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts. Tax cuts never built a single highway. Tax 
cuts never built a transit system. Tax cuts never replaced a bridge.
  Tax cuts are not the answer to all of America's problems. We need to 
invest in our public infrastructure in this country. The most solid 
core point of this bill is what we are debating right now, more than 
$40 billion of investment in the future of America putting our highways 
and our bridges back in good repair, rebuilding our transit systems, 
beginning to provide new capacity, to get people more efficiently to 
work, to avoid the costs of congestion, the costs of the deficient 
services we suffer.
  These are jobs. I heard someone, some bizarre Republican stand up 
earlier and say something about the difference between work and jobs. 
This is work that puts Americans to work, and it's jobs, and it 
rebuilds our country. I don't quite get what point that person was 
making. And it's not a tax cut. It's real investment.
  I can justify borrowing money to build a bridge or a transit system 
that will serve the next two or three or four or five generations of 
Americans a lot more than I can justify a tax cut which is gone 
tomorrow and did nothing to rebuild our future.
  They lack vision. In this we will buy American products. ``Buy 
American'' is the theme of transportation policy in this country. We 
will buy buses made in America. We will even start buying street cars 
for the first time made in America.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield the gentleman an additional minute.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. We are going to rebuild our bridges made with steel in 
America, concrete sourced in America, labor of American workers. This 
is the core of this bill. It's not enough, in my opinion, and I have 
made that clear and made some angry by saying that, as has the 
chairman.
  But it is a good, solid down payment and a solid core for an American 
recovery with these investments. Stop talking just about one-note tax 
cuts. They didn't work for George Bush. They are not going to work 
today. We need to begin real investment and rebuilding our future, 
transportation infrastructure. This is the core of this bill.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 seconds to the distinguished 
member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Brady).
  Mr. BRADY of Texas. I would point out that it was a Democrat Congress 
that for decades robbed from the highway trust fund, and it was the 
Republican Congress, with the Republican President, who insisted for 
the first time that all the highway fuel dollars would go to actually 
building highways and bridges in America.
  I would note too, Republicans doubled the research and development 
budget of America, not Democrats.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
chairman of the Republican Conference, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Pence).
  (Mr. PENCE asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. PENCE. Mr. Chairman, it should be evident to anyone looking on 
tonight, from the passion that's displayed on both sides of the aisle, 
this is a serious debate. The American people are hurting. Many 
millions of Americans have lost their jobs and many more are worried 
that they will be next.
  And so we come to this floor tonight to begin a debate on legislation 
that should, in the best of worlds, be a result of a thorough vetting 
and a thorough and bipartisan negotiation over what would be, on 
balance, in the best interests of the American people. But this 
legislation falls far short of that standard, and I rise to oppose it.
  I commend the President of the United States today for coming to 
Capitol Hill and meeting with House Republicans. It was a frank and 
cordial discussion. The conversation is not compromised, and the 
American people deserve to know that Democrats in Congress have 
completely ignored our new President's call for bipartisanship in the 
formation of this stimulus bill.
  In reality, House Democrats have used this moment of national 
economic crisis to fund big government priorities under the guise of 
stimulating the economy. As I told President Obama today, we take him 
at his word, but we urge him to make good on his pledge to challenge 
his party to set aside partisan differences and to bring the best ideas 
from both parties to the table, and this bill does not accomplish that.
  The promises of change and bipartisanship ring hollow in the face of 
a stimulus bill that does little more than fund a wish list of long-
standing liberal spending priorities.
  I ask, Mr. Chairman, what is $50 million for the National Endowment 
for the Arts going to do to create jobs in Indiana? What does $200 
million to plant sod on the National Mall going to do to put people 
back to work in your State, or $400 million for climate change research 
going to do to get America working again.
  The truth is the bill that we will consider tomorrow, fashioned 
entirely by the majority in this House, won't stimulate anything but 
more government and more debt. The slow and wasteful spending of the 
House Democrat bill is a disservice to millions of Americans, and 
Republicans are disappointed, but the American people should be 
disappointed as well. These are serious times, and what will come to 
the floor tomorrow is not a serious effort to address this crisis with 
reform.
  Republicans have a plan. We don't claim to have the exclusive right 
to all the best ideas in the world, but the time-honored tradition of 
stimulus from this Chamber has always included real and immediate and 
significant tax relief for working families, small businesses and 
family farms. Handing out rebate checks this year, like we did last 
year, will likely have as little result stimulating our economy as it 
did before.
  And so we will take our case to the American people. We may lose on 
the floor tomorrow, but the American people will have a choice between 
slow and wasteful government spending and a plan that will bring tax 
relief to working families and small businesses.
  I urge opposition to the bill.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 30 seconds simply to point 
out that on the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure the 
Republicans have been engaged fully from

[[Page H574]]

2007 all through 2008 in fashioning a stimulus initiative. Their ideas 
have been fully engaged and they have participated in hearings and in 
the crafting of our portion of this bill.
  So whatever criticism there may be of other committees, I say it 
doesn't apply in our Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. In 
fact, Mr. Mica, my good friend, said our portion is a very good bill.
  I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. 
Eddie Bernice Johnson), Chair of the Water Resources Subcommittee.
  Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas. I want to thank the Chair of 
Transportation, as well as the Chair of Appropriations, for the hard 
work they put into this.
  Mr. Chairman, you know I strongly support the underlying bill. I know 
that I understand it differently than some others here. But if we keep 
doing the same thing that we have been doing for the last 8 years, we 
will get the same results. You can't do the same thing and expect the 
results to change.
  The needed funds for our Nation's roads, bridges, transit systems, 
airport and water-related infrastructure are very much needed. Over the 
past 2 years, the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment has 
held numerous hearings on the Nation's water-related infrastructure 
needs, whether it is the $300 billion to $400 billion investment needed 
to restore and upgrade our Nation's network of wastewater treatment 
infrastructure, or the projection of $50 billion to $60 billion for 
vital projects of the Corps of Engineers.
  The water-related infrastructure needs of this Nation are struggling 
and growing ever longer, and the longer it is put off, the more it will 
cost.

                              {time}  1915

  Each $1 billion of Federal funds invested in infrastructure creates 
and sustains approximately 34,000 to 47,000 jobs and $6.2 billion in 
economic activities. The $3 billion in infrastructure investment 
funding in the bill for the State of Texas will provide a real tangible 
benefit to the 700,000 individuals currently unemployed in our State, 
whether as a paycheck for those responsible for constructing these 
vital projects or through increased productivity for small businesses 
that produce the materials needed for these vital infrastructure 
projects.
  These people cannot pay taxes. They don't have jobs.
  However, unlike other economic recovery proposals, infrastructure 
investment provides not only a short-term benefit to American families, 
it also provides a long-term benefit in terms of sustainable and 
reliable infrastructure, as well as the potential for increased 
productivity for the Nation's economy through the efficient movement of 
goods and services.
  It also can enhance the overall quality of the Nation's water-related 
environment through the implementation of environmental restoration 
projects by the Corps of Engineers, and through the control of 
pollutant discharges from combined sewer and sanitary sewer upgrades.
  Finally, infrastructure investment provides one of the only benefits 
that cannot be shipped off to foreign lands. The direct beneficiaries 
of domestic infrastructure projects are our towns, our local 
communities, our constituents.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of Texas. I thank the ranking member for generously 
yielding to me.
  Mr. Chairman, here are a half dozen of many reasons to oppose this 
legislation. We should wait and gauge the impact of the $350 billion in 
TARP funds already approved before spending even more. Spending another 
$825 billion--$6,000 for every taxpayer in America--will inevitably 
hike inflation and increase taxes, further damaging the economy.
  Much of the money will be used to bail out States that have overspent 
their budget. This rewards bad behavior. What happened to the ``era of 
responsibility?''
  This is not free money. It's a nonsecure loan extracted from the 
American people. Let them keep the dollars and decide how to spend 
them. It would be far better to provide tax incentives and investment 
credits to the small businesses that create 70 percent of all new jobs 
in America. This massive monstrosity of spending is the wrong kind of 
change. It will only make the economic crisis wider, deeper, and 
longer.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the Chair of our 
Economic Development Subcommittee, the distinguished gentlewoman from 
the District of Columbia (Ms. Norton).
  Ms. NORTON. I thank the gentleman for yielding and for his very 
important and brilliant work on this bill. I thought I heard my friend 
talk about putting money in people's pockets. Have you forgotten that 
is exactly what we did with the last stimulus bill? And, guess what? It 
went to pay the Saudis, who are now enjoying that. People paid off 
their high gas bills, they paid down their credit cards. Understand 
that people are afraid to spend money.
  What does this bill do? This is not about ``the economy,'' it's not 
about ``the bailout.'' This bill is about jobs. What it says is if you 
give a person not money in his pocket, but a job, you have a better 
chance of reviving your economy.
  The GAO says, indeed, if done properly, a public infrastructure 
program will pay for itself, and more, over time, by increasing 
productivity. That is the reason we focus on infrastructure and it's 
interesting to know that many on the other side are pointing in that 
direction as well.
  I am not against some of the tax cuts, if properly done. But the 
reason we focus on infrastructure is that it alone has a track record 
of waking up other parts of the economy. That's what we want to do. 
This is about jobs. This is not about some generic economy. It is the 
multiplier effect that we are after. We are after jobs that then create 
support jobs on down the line. And there is no other expenditure that 
has been shown to do that as well as infrastructure.
  We've got a job to do to make sure, as the chairman says, that this 
gets done, and gets done quickly. But there can be no debate. Even as 
we heard testimony, investments in infrastructure have a broader effect 
and a bigger benefit on the economy than, for example, tax cuts, or any 
form of tax relief.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. 
Paulsen).
  Mr. PAULSEN. I thank the gentleman.
  Mr. Chairman, I am pleased that the President has asked for swift 
action to spur the economy in the need to usher in a new era of 
responsibility. I also agree that Congress must act immediately to help 
get our economy back on track.
  My concern with the bill that we are addressing here tonight is that 
it is acting irresponsibly. This stimulus bill has essentially now 
turned into a supplemental spending bill. The budget deficit is already 
more than $1 trillion this year alone. What is Congress proposing? More 
borrowing and more spending.
  After this bill passes, Mr. Chairman, the annual budget deficit will 
surpass $2 trillion in just 1 year. Just this 1 year. An economic 
stimulus should be quick and it should be immediate. However, the 
recent analysis by the Congressional Budget Office shows that only 7 to 
8 percent of the infrastructure spending, which is valuable in this 
plan, will be delivered in the economy in the first year alone, and 
less than half will be spent in the first 2 years.
  Mr. Chair, a real fiscal stimulus is one that will put people back to 
work and focuses like a laser beam to help protect and preserve and, 
most importantly, create jobs. Why aren't we focusing tonight on 
helping small businesses do what they do best?
  We need to make sure that we are allowing those small businesses, the 
entrepreneurs, the risk-takers, the innovators, and the self-employed, 
do what they do best, and that is create jobs. Unfortunately, this bill 
has become a grab bag of special interest spending, and many of these 
may be some worthwhile projects, but they should not be snuck into a 
stimulus bill.
  Instead, let's focus on changing politics as usual and working 
together and finding real solutions to put people back to work.
  Mr. OBERSTAR. How much time remains?
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Minnesota has 1 minute remaining.

[[Page H575]]

  Mr. OBERSTAR. I yield the remaining time to the distinguished 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Connolly).
  Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. As a new Member of this body, this is going 
to be one of the most important votes I cast. And to hear some of the 
rhetoric tonight from the other side makes one think of Charles 
Dickens. Are there no workhouses?
  We are in the worst economic meltdown in 76 years. The middle class 
is crying for relief. We are on a precipice, and this body must act. I 
feel duty-bound to cast my vote in favor of this legislation because it 
is action. It is designed to spur infrastructure. It is designed to 
provide middle-class tax relief.
  And when I hear language of special interest, I wonder if we mean by 
that our State and local governments that are hemorrhaging red ink and 
need the relief contained in this legislation. As someone who's just 
come from local government, I know firsthand how every State and every 
locality in this country is hurting.
  I intend to support this legislation, especially the infrastructure 
provisions in it that will get people back to work and spur local 
economies.
  Mr. CAMP. At this time, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I am 
interested in the comment just made by the gentleman from Northern 
Virginia, Mr. Connolly. If the gentleman would take a question, I'd be 
pleased to yield to him for an answer.
  Mr. Connolly, would you be interested in taking a question? I was 
interested in your comments, because you said, Mr. Connolly from 
Northern Virginia----
  The CHAIR. The gentleman will address the Chair, please.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Mr. Chair, the gentleman said these are the 
worst economic times, and this will stimulate infrastructure. I was 
wondering if the gentleman was aware that only 7 percent, or $26 
billion of the $274 billion in infrastructure money, will be spent by 
the end of this budget year. And adding the interest, this stimulus, 
which will exceed $1.1 trillion, will cost each and every American 
$3,300 in this economy.
  Does the gentleman think that that is a wise idea? I yield to the 
gentleman.
  Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chair, if I understand the gentleman's 
question, first of all, I think his numbers are not correct, if I look 
at the Chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. I 
think it's considerably more than the number the gentleman has cited.
  I also think the gentleman fails to recognize that there's 
cumulatively $120 billion of relief for State and local governments. I 
would also point out to him that every State and every locality 
virtually in this country is hemorrhaging red ink.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, and I would 
ask the gentleman to tell the House if he believes that in this worst 
economy that it's appropriate to put in place a policy that makes it so 
that each and every American is liable for $3,300 more; $3,300 more for 
each and every single American. Is that an appropriate policy to be put 
in place at this time, I would ask the gentleman.
  Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chair, I don't believe that is the 
appropriate question.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman. That is 
indeed the appropriate question. And that is why you hear individuals 
on our side of the aisle fighting on behalf of the American taxpayer, 
fighting on behalf of American jobs, fighting on behalf of appropriate 
policy that will in fact stimulate the economy.
  Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I think the opposite is true. 
I think the gentleman is fighting for policies that prove to be a 
failure.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Georgia has control of the time.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. We all want our economy to turn around. The 
question really isn't is this too much or too big, although I believe 
it to be. The question is, Will it work, and, What else is in this 
bill?
  I want to highlight an item that is buried in this bill. The 
Comparative Effectiveness Research Council. $1.1 billion for this 
board. In the language, it states, regarding health care, ``Those 
items, procedures and interventions that are most effective to prevent, 
control, and treat health conditions will be utilized, while those no 
longer found to be effective and, in some cases, more expensive, will 
no longer be prescribed.''
  Mr. Chairman, this is the beginning and the foundation of 
nationalized health care.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. PRICE of Georgia. I thank the gentleman. In fact, the Secretary 
of Health and Human Services said in his book that this body would have 
recommendations that may not have teeth because all Federal health 
programs would have to abide by them. But Congress would go back and 
further the board's recommendations. It could, for example, link the 
tax exclusion for health insurance to insurance companies that comply 
with the board's recommendations.
  Mr. Chairman, this is indeed the foundation of rationing of American 
health care for each and every American. Not only will there be no 
stimulus in this bill, there will be major policy changes to health 
care; nationalized health care on its way, courtesy of the majority 
party.
  The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords) now controls 5 
minutes of the time.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. I'd like to thank Chairman Obey as well for all his 
work, and members of the committee on both sides of this bill, and I 
yield myself such time as I may consume.
  As a member of the Science and Technology Committee, it's my great 
privilege to work with Chairman Gordon and Ranking Member Hall to 
advance our Nation's capabilities in scientific research and 
technological innovation.
  The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act contains critical funding 
for the National Science Foundation, the Office of Science at the 
Department of Energy, the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and 
NASA. It also includes significant funding for research and development 
in advanced energy technologies.
  These critical investments will create high-quality jobs, strengthen 
our economic competitiveness, and improve access to clean, affordable 
energy.
  With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMP. I'd like to inquire of the Chair the time remaining.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from Michigan has 28 minutes remaining.
  Mr. CAMP. And on the other side?
  The CHAIR. The gentleman has 51 minutes.
  Mr. CAMP. At this time we will reserve our time until it becomes a 
little more balanced, Mr. Chairman.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
Wu).

                              {time}  1930

  Mr. WU. I thank the gentlelady, and I rise in support of the 
underlying legislation.
  I want to commend President Obama, his administration, Speaker 
Pelosi, Chairman Obey and Chairman Gordon for their leadership and 
commitment to ensure that this bill provides strong funding for 
science, technology, and long-term economic growth in order to get our 
economy back on track. We need to rebuild from the ground up. We need 
to invest in research that will create the jobs of the 21st century, 
including those jobs in health information technology.
  Health IT has the potential to reduce medical errors, decrease 
inefficient, unnecessary, duplicative treatments that cost our health 
care system $300 billion annually. Health IT should lower our health 
care costs while improving the quality and safety of care. Health IT is 
economic stimulus.
  However, one study states that more than 40,000 health care IT 
workers will be needed in health care facilities, and jobs already 
exist in this field. We just need qualified workers. Without the staff 
needed, our investments in health IT will do little to meet the 
potential of this field. That is why I am happy to see the provisions 
of the 10,000 Trained by 2010 Act, a bill that I introduced, are 
included as part of this legislation. My legislation helps train 
individuals

[[Page H576]]

in health IT, and provides the seed corn to create the jobs of our new 
economy in a field that will help curb the cost of health care for 
years to come. I urge my colleagues to support the provision and the 
legislation.
  Mr. CAMP. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I think when I yielded time earlier in the 
day, I shortchanged the gentlewoman from Arizona (Ms. Giffords) by 5 
minutes. I would like to yield an additional 5 minutes of my time to 
her.
  The CHAIR. The gentlewoman will control an additional 5 minutes of 
the time.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from Maryland (Ms. Edwards).
  Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Bill of 2009.
  We are entering a new era of job creation through science, research, 
and technology, and this bill makes timely targeted investments to 
create high-quality jobs, strengthen American competitiveness, and 
improve access to clean affordable energy.
  The bill allocates funds to the National Institute of Standards and 
Technology, which is in my congressional district in Maryland, for 
competitive construction grants for research science buildings at 
colleges, universities, and other research organizations and to 
coordinate research efforts of laboratories and national research 
facilities by setting standards for manufacturing.
  The bill also allocates funds to the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration to put more scientists to work doing climate change, 
important climate change research, including earth science recommended 
by the National Academies, satellite sensors that measure solar 
radiation critical to understanding climate change.
  I am proud that this bill includes $10 billion for science research 
facilities and instrumentation, to focus American brain power and 
education on solving the energy and climate challenges.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.
  Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. This is an investment for the 21st century. 
It is for our children, it is for our grandchildren. I applaud Chairman 
Gordon and the House leadership for making these investments, and I 
urge my colleagues to support this bill. This is about the future.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Tonko).
  Mr. TONKO. Mr. Chairman, I represent the capital region of New York 
State, an area which, led by Thomas Edison, pioneered a revolution in 
electricity which changed our society a century ago. I believe it is 
with that spirit that we look to take bold action with the American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
  This package contains some $4 billion for job training, which is 
essential to preparing the American workers to compete for the jobs of 
the future. It also contains $2 billion for alternative energy 
research, and $11 billion to develop and build the next generation 
energy grid. These are crucial investments that will create high-paying 
jobs right now and make our country more secure and energy efficient 
into the future.
  In these difficult economic times, we must not forget our commitment 
to our children and grandchildren. The stimulus bill will provide over 
$140 billion to make sure that our education system can move forward 
into the 21st century. We must act now and boldly to move our country 
in the right direction and to provide relief for our overburdened 
working families.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Chairman, may I inquire how much time we have 
remaining?
  The CHAIR. The gentlewoman has 4\1/2\ minutes remaining.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Ohio (Mr. Boccieri).
  (Mr. BOCCIERI asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. BOCCIERI. Mr. Chairman, the people of Ohio's 16th District 
elected me to fight for them and their tax dollars. The American 
Recovery and Reinvestment Act is about putting America first. It is 
about investing in our country. Some on the other side didn't bat an 
eye when they voted to use American tax dollars to rebuild Iraq, 
spending billions on new roads and bridges there. There was no outrage 
during those spending days.
  Our people are hurting. Our people are struggling and asking us for 
leadership. It is time to put partisanship aside. In this time of great 
need, investing in our schools, our roads, our bridges is about making 
America stronger. Ohio will receive a much-needed economic boost with 
these resources, and we will invest in the future of our country. Ohio 
needs the estimated $1.5 billion in infrastructure improvements to help 
create jobs. Creating jobs in alternative energy like fuel cells or 
plug-in hybrids being researched in my district will move us away from 
the dependence on foreign oil. This bill will help America innovate and 
invest in the jobs of tomorrow.
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 1 minute to the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Peters).
  Mr. PETERS. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1. This recovery 
package supports the development of new advanced vehicle technologies 
that will lower emissions, improve fuel economy, and create new jobs 
across the country. This bill includes $2 billion to build new 
manufacturing facilities for the kinds of advanced vehicle batteries 
and battery components that will power the next generation of vehicles.
  We are facing a global credit crisis, and auto companies around the 
world are struggling. Foreign governments are taking dramatic steps to 
help their own auto companies. If we are going to ensure the next 
generation of green manufacturing jobs are created here in the United 
States, we have to invest now in these advanced technologies. This bill 
helps ensure that we do not trade our dependence on foreign oil for a 
dependence on foreign batteries and other technologies.
  The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is good for Michigan and 
it is good for America. I urge its passage here today.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished 
ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Barton).
  (Mr. BARTON of Texas asked and was given permission to revise and 
extend his remarks.)
  Mr. BARTON of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the so-
called stimulus bill for a number of reasons, both process and 
procedural. On the process, we had 1 day to consider 270 pages of text 
in the Energy and Commerce Committee. Five Republican amendments were 
accepted during the markup; three of those five were stricken from the 
bill before it came to the floor, and the fourth one, which is in the 
bill, is in the bill in a different form than which it was agreed upon 
during the negotiations during the markup. I don't think that is really 
good form.
  On the substance of the bill, most of the Energy and Commerce title 
is really social program policy and spending. It may be good, but it is 
not stimulative in and of itself in terms of what we are here to do.
  There is one title in the energy section which I think my friends on 
the majority side need to know about; it is something called 
decoupling. It gives a utility the right to petition a State that if 
the consumers in that State do all these energy efficient measures and 
they decrease their use of electricity, by decoupling what the 
consumers pay for it the utility has a revenue guarantee: Use less, pay 
more. I mean, as insane as that sounds, it is in this bill. I offered 
an amendment to strike that from the bill in the committee and it was 
on a party line vote rejected. Every Democrat voted to keep that in the 
bill; every Republican voted to remove it.
  So if this actually becomes law, if a governor of a State acts 
positively on a petition from a utility in that State, the utility can 
decouple what it charges your voters for what you pay for electricity 
regardless of how much you use. If somebody cuts their electricity use 
20 percent, they pay the same. Now, I don't know about most voters, but 
I know my voters, if they

[[Page H577]]

conserve and consume less electricity, they want to pay less; but under 
this bill, they are going to pay more. How is that stimulative to the 
economy? I think that is actually destructive of the economy.
  So, Mr. Chairman, with all due respect, while there is some good in 
this bill, there is so much that is really not stimulative, and there 
is some stuff that is just really harmful that we should vote ``no.''
  There is one other thing. Under this bill, they struck the amendment 
by Mr. Stearns that says if a millionaire wants to get on COBRA and get 
his health care paid for two-thirds of the premium, he has got to prove 
that he is not a millionaire, that he doesn't have income and he 
doesn't have assets. They accepted that on a voice vote in the 
committee, but they struck it out. So there is no income test, there is 
no means test. Basically, Mr. Madoff, who just defrauded billions and 
billions of dollars, is going to be eligible for COBRA assistance under 
this bill. Vote ``no.''
  Ms. GIFFORDS. Mr. Chairman, I now yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  As a Representative from the State of Arizona, the State that is the 
most abundant State in terms of sunshine, I would like to take the 
remainder of the time to talk about my support for solar power.
  A strong solar power industry is going to create good jobs, it is 
going to increase our competitiveness internationally, and it is also 
going to help us reduce the threat of climate change. This form of 
renewable energy is going to be good for our economy, it is absolutely 
going to create much-needed jobs, and it is really going to focus on 
that next 21st century economy. It is going to really focus on our 
future. So I am pleased that this legislation includes some solar 
investments such as research and basic science, basic energy science, 
as well as applied research and development. The bill also includes 
critical funding for critical research into advanced transmission and 
energy storage technologies, what Representative Peters from Michigan 
spoke of earlier.
  Innovation in these two areas is essential to unlocking solar power's 
full potential. But that is not all that is included in this bill. We 
also are looking at language that contains critical financial 
incentives to support the development of solar power generating 
facilities. These provisions offer direct grants to qualified renewable 
energy products in lieu of the investment tax credits, also known as 
the ITC.
  In the current economic downturn, the ITC cannot achieve its full 
potential, because many entities that would like to invest in solar 
power do not have taxable income. Therefore, this grant program is 
essential.
  Unfortunately, the grant programs application is limited. It falls 
short of supporting large-scale solar projects with long lead times. We 
have seen many of these projects proposed throughout the Southwest and 
in other areas. That is why I have offered an amendment to expand this 
provision to include the large solar projects with the greatest 
potential to boost our economy. They are going to maximize job 
creation, foster greater investments and dramatically expand the amount 
of power our Nation gets from solar energy.
  So as this bill moves forward, I urge the House and Senate to 
consider this amendment. We have this opportunity to take advantage and 
facilitate large and small scale projects. I would like us to help 
achieve President Obama's goal of doubling our Nation's renewable power 
capacity over the next 3 years. We are looking at 40,000 new jobs and 
$8 billion in investment. This is exactly the kind of bold action our 
Nation needs.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
  Mr. CAMP. I reserve the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Velazquez), the 
chairwoman of the Small Business Administration, now controls 5 minutes 
of the time.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  (Ms. Velazquez asked and was given permission to revise and extend 
her remarks.)
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I rise in support of the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009, which will help restore stability to our 
weakened economy and drive growth within the small business community.
  Mr. Chairman, in a recent hearing my committee met an entrepreneur, 
Thomas Rankin, whose 83-year-old family business, Ramer Lumber, had 
managed to weather the great Depression but wasn't able to survive the 
current downturn. This past November, his business closed its door for 
good.
  All across the country, countless small business firms are facing the 
same fate. Recovery efforts enacted last fall have not trickled down to 
Main Street. From Mom and Pop restaurants to technology startups, small 
firms of every kind are suffering. What we need now are solutions that 
work for entrepreneurs. After all, they are the ones that are promoting 
growth and they are the ones with a proven track record of creating 
jobs.

                              {time}  1945

  But, unfortunately, a combination of restrictive lending and 
tightening credit has stunted small business growth, preventing 
entrepreneurs from playing their historic role of economic catalyst.
  The Recovery and Reinvestment Act will help turn the tide. To begin 
with, $30 billion in targeted tax measures would allow struggling 
startups to stay afloat. For example, the bill will repeal the 
burdensome 3 percent withholding requirement for government contractors 
and allow for enhanced expensing for small businesses' purchases. For 
cash-strapped entrepreneurs, these initiatives could make the 
difference between meeting payroll and making layoffs.
  The Recovery and Reinvestment Act also promises to thaw frozen small 
business lending and increase guaranties for new loans. At the same 
time, it will reopen the secondary market which has ground to a halt. 
Taken all together, these initiatives will put $13 billion into the 
hands of small businesses immediately, allowing entrepreneurs to do 
what they do best, create jobs. Small business lending provisions 
within the Recovery and Reinvestment Act will keep and create over 
400,000 jobs. And at the end of the day, that is what small businesses 
do best, create jobs.
  With unemployment at a 16-year high, let's not kid ourselves. There 
can be no recovery without job creation. That is why it is so critical 
that entrepreneurs have the resources they need to not just survive the 
downturn but to emerge from it stronger and ready to bring our economy 
back on track.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I want to say thank you to my 
colleagues who are joining me on the floor to fight this stimulus bill 
that we have before us. Actually, using ``stimulus'' on this piece of 
legislation is an incorrect term, because when we look at this, what we 
have learned today is primarily that this is just another spending 
bill.
  I find it so interesting. I don't know if my colleagues have had the 
opportunity to look at what the information we've had from the 
Congressional Budget Office, the CBO. And I know time and again, when 
we were in the majority, you all would take the CBO figures as the 
gospel. So it's a little bit of a head scratcher to us. You want to say 
you have a stimulus bill. But it's a spending bill. It's going to cost 
$1.1 trillion when you add the interest. But, interestingly enough, Mr. 
Chairman, that money doesn't go into the economy quickly. And I think 
that is what our constituents are so interested to learn.
  Out of this $836 billion, and you add the interest in and you are at 
$1.16 trillion, now, $92 billion of that is released within the next 12 
months. That is 2009 money. And then in 2010 you get another $225 
billion, and in 2011 you get $159 billion.
  Well, Mr. Chairman, ``stimulus'' means something immediate that is 
targeted, that is focused and that is going to address a problem. And 
we don't see that in this piece of legislation.

[[Page H578]]

  It is more spending on top of more spending. It is $50 million for 
the National Endowment for the Arts. It is $16 billion for Pell Grants. 
It is $2.1 billion for Head Start. It is $200 million for the National 
Mall. That is not stimulus.
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. That is not stimulus. That is government spending. 
That is growth of government problems. If you want to stimulate the 
economy, reduce taxes and leave money with the taxpayers, pay attention 
to small business and listen to their needs.
  Mr. Chairman, my colleagues, the Democrats in Congress are building a 
``Bridge to Bankruptcy'' for a lot of small businesses, for a lot of 
American families and for the U.S. government.
  I urge my colleagues to stand strongly against H.R. 1.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlelady from 
Illinois (Mrs. Halvorson).
  Mrs. HALVORSON. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairwoman 
Velazquez for the opportunity to speak on this matter of utmost 
importance to the American people. Nothing is more critical at this 
moment in time than creating jobs. Days ago I learned that an important 
employer in my district is cutting 20,000 jobs. This is terrifying news 
to many of my constituents because each lost job forces a family to 
make difficult decisions. Health insurance becomes more difficult to 
maintain. College costs become more overwhelming. Mortgage payments 
become impossible to meet. It's clear we must act decisively, 
immediately, and on a scale that is bold, innovative and that will 
create new jobs to grow our economy.
  It's critical that we invest in American infrastructure, including 
schools, energy, technology and small businesses. The American Recovery 
and Reinvestment Act will do exactly that.
  I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I reserve my time.
  The CHAIR. The gentlewoman from New York has 1 minute remaining.
  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman, as a result of restricting lending and 
vanishing credit, small firms spanning every sector are folding at 
alarming rates. This is particularly troubling because they comprise 95 
percent of American industry and employ half of the private sector 
workforce.
  When these businesses disappear, so do many millions of American 
jobs. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act offers an opportunity 
to keep the jobs we still have and to create hundreds of thousands 
more. Just as importantly, it is an investment in our Nation's 
entrepreneurs, the people creating jobs, driving innovation and 
strengthening the backbone of our economy.
  I urge the adoption of this bill.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. CAMP. I continue to reserve.
  The CHAIR. The gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Spratt) controls 
the next 5 minutes.
  Mr. SPRATT. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we can debate this bill endlessly tonight, but no one 
can contest this point, this fact; we are in the midst of the greatest, 
longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression.
  The question before us is simply this: Will we act, act now and act 
boldly in an effort to restore our economy to a healthy status, or will 
we run the risk that this recession will become even deeper and longer?
  Now, I know that some doubt or disdain the steps taken so far by the 
government. Let me say up until a week ago that government was the Bush 
administration. I know that some question whether or not these steps 
have done any good. But let's go back to September and October. We 
witnessed a complete collapse of confidence in the global financial 
system and a wrenching credit crunch for corporate and consumer 
borrowers both. The spread between the 3-month LIBOR, the London 
Interbank Lending Rate, and 3-month Treasuries, which is a proxy for 
the willingness of banks to lend money, reached 360 basis points, 3.6 
percent. Many feared, with good reason, that we would soon be in a 
cash-and-carry economy.
  We passed the bill which provided additional liquidity. It hasn't 
accomplished all we hoped it would. But the spread that I just 
mentioned has fallen from 360 basis points to 100 basis points, still 
double the normal spread, but that is a big improvement and one clear 
indication that government actions have produced some good effect. 
Sure, they are not lending as much as we would like. Financing for 
consumer durables like autos and homes is not where we'd like it to be. 
But we are a lot better off than we would have been if the government 
had not intervened.
  Now, I know some recoil at the enormous costs we are incurring. And 
I'll be frank with you, I find it stunning. $825 billion. But the cost 
of doing nothing is not zero. Far from it. What is the cost of doing 
nothing? Well, the CBO tells us that the cost of doing nothing, nothing 
tonight, nothing further, could be as much as a 2.2 percent contraction 
in GDP over 2009, the current year, and an unemployment rate climbing 
to 9 to 10 percent. Other forecasters predict even worse. We had 
several before our committee today. Mark Zandi of Moody's Economy.Com 
forecasted today a 3.4 percent contraction in the economy in 2009 with 
unemployment soaring to 11 percent next year.
  Still people say, well, why does the government need to respond? Why 
can't we let this recession, like others in the past, run its course 
and self-correct? Well, our economy is up against some major head 
winds. Consumers have cut spending because their principal asset, their 
home, has plummeted in value by 20 percent, and some say it may go 20 
percent more before we reach a reasonable trend line. There are huge 
overhangs in the real estate market. Real estate may have led us out of 
past recessions, but not this one. Nor will automotives. If anything, 
they are in deeper doldrums. With credit shrinking and retail sales 
falling, it is unlikely that the manufacturing sector will step up the 
production of goods for which there is little market. Finally, with the 
Fed fund rates at virtually zero, monetary policy is at the end of its 
tether.
  What is left, if we were to do something, if we were to intervene, if 
we were to restore health to our economy? A major fiscal response by 
the government is the only viable option left on the table.
  Now, what could a $825 billion stimulus bill accomplish? CBO 
forecasts an economy in 2009 or GDP equal to $14.2 trillion if we don't 
act. That is an economy operating at 6.8 percent less than its 
reasonable capacity, its potential. CBO predicts the same for 2010. My 
friend, that is a gap of nearly $1 trillion in potential production, 
goods and services that people in this country could enjoy and use, $1 
trillion a year if we don't act.
  According to CBO, the recovery bill will raise output between 1.3 
percent and 3.6 percent by the end of this year. If we take the middle 
of that range, 2.5 percent, that is an additional $350 billion worth of 
goods and services purchased which businesses will then generate into 
several million badly-needed jobs.
  A recovery bill that invests in America and begins to repair our 
stock of capital will yield dividends down the road. If investing in 
our schools, our children, our workforce, our roads, our bridges, our 
ports, our schools, our waterways, our transit and our scientific and 
technological base did not produce solid economic returns, how would 
our Nation have ever emerged to lead the world.
  I urge everyone to support H.R. 1, the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from Minnesota (Mrs. 
Bachmann).
  Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Michigan for 
yielding and for the fine work that he is doing on these moments that 
we have together.
  One guarantee that we do have from the stimulus bill that we can 
count on, that we can take to the bank, on which there will be no 
disagreement and no dissent is this: If we pass this $825 billion 
stimulus tomorrow, and it seems to be a certain thing because the 
majority has the votes, and if we add to that the debt service which 
would be over $300 billion added on top of that, bringing us to a total 
of over $1.1 trillion, the certainty, the guarantee that

[[Page H579]]

we will take to the bank, that we will need to look at the American 
people straight in the eye and be four square honest in telling them is 
this: You will encounter punishingly high tax increases at every level 
of the economic spectrum. It's a given. We have to.
  Why can we say this with certainty? Because someone has to pay this 
bill. When you go out to eat, the check comes and someone has to pay 
for it. Maybe a nice person at the other table will pay for your check. 
But at the end of the day, someone is paying that check. And it's the 
American people that are paying for this party.
  Make no mistake. This stimulus bill has very little to do with 
stimulating the economy and helping the average American. This is a 
bailout for big government. And let's get ready. We are looking at 
massive tax increases and we are looking at massive inflation or both. 
In fact, we could be looking at hyperinflation.
  I don't want to be ``Debbie Downer'' bringing bad news to the 
American public, but it's a certainty. If you spend money at this 
level, and consider we are spending almost as much money on this 
stimulus bill as we will spend in our discretionary spending, take it 
to the bank. That is our future.
  Mr. Chairman, the legislation under consideration today will saddle 
generations of taxpayers with hundreds of billions of dollars of debt 
and will, I fear, not lead this country to real economic recovery.
  The Democrats' bill has a starting price of $825 billion--enough 
money to give every person living in poverty in the United States 
$22,000.
  In fact, the total cost of this one piece of legislation is almost as 
much as the annual discretionary budget for the entire Federal 
Government.
  To make matters worse, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office 
(CBO) estimates that the real cost of the legislation will be more than 
$1 trillion.
  CBO reports that if Congress borrows more than $800 billion, it will 
burden future generations with an additional $347 billion in interest 
payments. That totals more than $1.1 trillion.
  And, regrettably, that total includes frivolous spending on items 
such as $600 million for new cars for the Federal Government and $21 
million for sod to fill in the mall after the inauguration.
  We must not forget our responsibility to the taxpayer simply because 
we label something a crisis or even a response to a crisis.
  The Democrats' have tried to sell this proposal as a transportation 
and infrastructure investment package. And, I'm all for investing in 
rebuilding our Nation's roads and bridges and believe that government 
spending on transportation infrastructure projects is absolutely 
important.
  However, only $30 billion of the bill--or three percent--is for road 
and highway spending. And, CBO states that much of this spending will 
take several years to make any stimulative impact.
  My constituents understand that we cannot spend our way to prosperity 
and that serious consequences lie ahead if Congress goes down this 
irresponsible borrow-and-spend path.
  What the American people really need are long-term, permanent tax 
cuts which will impact families twice as fast as the Democrats' 
government spending in this bill. These tax cuts will spur job creation 
and help stabilize the economy over the long run.
  I support much-needed, incentive-based relief for small businesses, 
the job-creators and the backbone of our economy, and I believe we must 
reduce the financial burden that the Federal Government imposes on 
middle-class families.
  I'm a cosponsor of the Economic Recovery and Middle-Class Tax Relief 
Act, which is a real economic recovery plan that has NO welfare 
spending, NO pork-barrel spending, and NO bailouts.
  This package would immediately inject private capital into our 
economy and at the same time, it would lay the groundwork for sustained 
economic growth.
  It includes a permanent 5 percent across-the-board income tax cut. It 
increases, and makes permanent, the child tax credit to $5,000 and 
makes the lower 15 percent capital gains and dividends rates permanent.
  It repeals the Alternative Minimum Tax, AMT, on individuals--a 
punitive and outdated relic of a tax which will hit more than 30 
million people in 2009.
  It permanently repeals required distributions on retirement accounts 
and makes all withdrawals from IRAs tax- and penalty-free during 2009. 
And, it increases by 50 percent the tax deduction on student loans and 
on qualified higher education expenses.
  These are just some of the key initiatives of this legislation.
  We have seen the mistakes of tax-and-spend government policies in the 
past and know that they will not lead to long-term economic growth and 
recovery.
  We must implement real, permanent tax relief for American families 
and stop this Washington spending spree that will burden many 
generations to come.

                              {time}  2000

  Mr. CAMP. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
Walden).
  Mr. WALDEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in opposition to this spending 
bill that is before us.
  I spent 12 hours in the Energy and Commerce Committee where we marked 
up our portion of this legislation, and I think there were some real 
amazing things in this bill that maybe some people on this floor don't 
know about. I was going to ask the gentlelady from Illinois (Mrs. 
Halvorson) about it because she mentioned insurance. In here is a 
provision for the taxpayers in my district who are still working to 
support insurance payments up to 65 percent for those who may lose 
their jobs.
  In the Energy and Commerce Committee, we passed an amendment in a 
bipartisan way to say that millionaires who made a million bucks last 
year, you don't have to have my taxpayers support your COBRA payments. 
Unfortunately, somewhere along the mystical way that this bill came to 
the floor, that bipartisan amendment got stripped out. So now you could 
be Madoff, I suppose, and get your COBRA paid for.
  There is a recoupling provision in here on energy that I think is one 
of the most perverse things I have ever heard of; that if my 
constituents invest in energy conservation in their homes to reduce 
their energy consumption, which is good for the environment and good 
for their wallets, if you vote for this, you are going to vote to say 
the utility companies can raise their rates to make up the lost 
revenue. So this puts utility company revenues ahead of consumers in 
States, Massachusetts, Oregon, the other 48 States and the territories. 
You are going to encourage them on the one hand to conserve on energy, 
and on the other hand you are going to grant this new authority so the 
utility companies can raise their electricity or gas rates.
  This is an enormous borrowing bill. This is making the Federal 
Government the next subprime lender. Why else is it for the first time 
I believe in our country's history there is now an insurance product 
available on U.S. securities? Why? Because people are starting around 
the world to say we are not so sure about America.
  I am trying to figure out, and maybe the gentleman on the other side 
of the aisle can answer, who is going to loan us this money? Have we 
ever gone to the market for $2 trillion to $3 trillion?
  The CHAIR. The Chair understands the gentleman from Michigan is the 
remaining speaker on this side. The gentleman from Wisconsin has the 
right to close.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, we have one remaining speaker in addition to 
myself.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I have two remaining speakers on this side.
  First, I would like to redesignate the time previously allocated to 
the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform to the gentlewoman 
from New Hampshire (Ms. Shea-Porter) of the Education and Labor 
Committee, 2 minutes.
  Ms. SHEA-PORTER. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in strong support of the 
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. This legislation is necessary 
to rebuild our economy. Like other States, my State of New Hampshire 
has been hit hard by the Nation's economic crisis. Our unemployment 
rate has risen, foreclosures have increased, and the State is facing a 
very serious budget shortfall.
  Over the past few weeks, I have traveled throughout my district 
talking to local officials, business owners, and other constituents. In 
each meeting I have attended, the main theme is the same: 
infrastructure and jobs, infrastructure and jobs.
  In Dover, we talked about the need to replace some of the water and 
sewer piping of a system that has been in existence since the late 19th 
century.
  In Portsmouth, we discovered the need to invest in the water 
treatment plant to guarantee safe drinking water into the future.
  In Manchester, the largest city in New Hampshire, I heard from the 
board

[[Page H580]]

of aldermen about the crucial need for transportation funding.
  In North Conway, I heard from town officials whose projects were not 
only necessary for public safety, but were forward-thinking, 
incorporating green energy technology.
  The infrastructure investments in this bill are essential for the 
current and future health of our economy. We cannot fund every worthy 
project, but we will create and save jobs in New Hampshire and across 
the Nation.
  I am very hopeful that these funds, like the investment that was made 
in Dover more than a century ago, will be used to make investments and 
infrastructure improvements that will leave real, meaningful and 
lasting results for our communities. After all, we are borrowing money, 
money that future generations of Americans will have to pay back. I 
hope that they will be able to see tangible benefits for their money.
  So many Americans families are hurting. We must not only acknowledge 
their pain, we must help them recover. This package will help them 
recover. This package will help America recover. I urge my colleagues 
to support this bill.
  Mr. CAMP. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. 
Roe).
  Mr. ROE of Tennessee. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this 
enormous economic stimulus package. To put its size in perspective, 
one-tenth of 1 percent of the stimulus would solve Tennessee's State 
budget deficit.
  To quote one of my favorite baseball philosophers, Yogi Berra, if you 
don't know where you're going, you might end up someplace else. I think 
with this bill we are going to end up someplace else.
  We know that this spending is enormous. The question is, is it going 
to work? This past week the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office 
cast doubt on whether this is going to be effective when it said only 7 
percent of the plan's infrastructure spending would be spent by the end 
of the first fiscal year, and only 65 percent of the total package 
would be spent by 2010. I as a previous mayor support infrastructure 
spending.
  Even more troubling for taxpayers is where their money is going. We 
were about to spend $50 million on the National Endowment of the Arts. 
Whatever one believes about spending taxpayer dollars on the arts, 
shouldn't we all be able to agree it should not be done when the 
country is facing a trillion dollar deficit and that it is not economic 
stimulus.
  Until it was exposed, this so-called economic stimulus bill was 
spending millions on birth control.
  People back in Tennessee are adapting to this troubling economic 
climate by tightening their belts and clamping down on unnecessary 
spending, and so they are understandably upset that the Federal 
Government's reaction is exactly the opposite. They are amazed that we 
preparing to spend an additional $825 billion of their money after a 
$700 billion bailout was spent without anybody being able to give a 
straight answer as to where the money went. They are skeptical of the 
results we are getting, and so am I. An economic stimulus project 
should fund projects that stimulate the economy, create jobs with long-
term economic growth, not as a short-term fix.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut (Ms. DeLauro).
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Chairman, the American people have been paying for 
the Republicans' party for the last 8 years. It is time now to get back 
to America's middle class. I rise in support of this economic recovery 
plan. It is a bold plan. It creates jobs and moves to long-term growth. 
We must act now to help a middle class hit hard by job insecurity, 
stagnant wages, rising health care costs, and a financial market in 
crisis. We have an urgent responsibility to invest wisely, target 
limited resources to proven initiatives that we know will boost 
employment, support economic growth, and provide critical relief.
  That means expanding eligibility of the child tax credit by reducing 
the threshold from $12,000 to zero. Over 16 million children would 
benefit. It means child care, Head Start, a serious infusion of 
resources to No Child Left Behind, and IDEA, investing in our long-term 
growth so future generations can compete. There is $40 billion for 
infrastructure funding, transit funding, additional billions for water, 
housing and school projects to put Americans back to work at a time 
when we are facing staggering unemployment.
  We need to put the resources in the hands of people most likely to 
spend them quickly. There is $100 billion in unemployment benefits and 
job training, $27 billion for rural development through health care, 
public safety services, and an additional $150 million for the 
Emergency Food Assistance Program, supporting food banks stretched thin 
by rising food prices and surging demands.
  Anyone looking for immediate and significant impact need look no 
further than Food Stamps, which generate $1.73 in new economic activity 
for every dollar invested.
  This bill provides $20 billion to increase the Food Stamp benefit 
which could reach 14 million households less than a month after the 
bill is enacted. Leading economists have said that increasing Food 
Stamps is one of the most efficient ways to prime the economy's pump, 
and it also helps part-time workers.
  No investments are more critical than those we have to make in human 
capital. I urge my colleagues to support the bill.
  Mr. CAMP. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, our economy is in a recession and we must act. The 
question, however, is what action do we take. The President has 
directly challenged us to put aside partisanship and find an American 
solution.
  I was pleased to meet with the President today and ask about 
including new provisions in this bill. Frankly, what we saw from the 
President today was a greater effort to reach out to Republicans than 
we have seen from the House majority.
  Mr. Chairman, the American people know we cannot spend our way to 
prosperity. What was once an $825 billion ``stimulus'' bill has now 
grown to be $1.1 trillion.
  The American people know that adding $1.1 trillion to the deficit for 
new spending on old government programs will not create jobs. They know 
small businesses create jobs, not the Federal Government. And they know 
families can better manage their budgets than the Federal Government.
  So as we go through this debate, we will point out some very simple 
facts about how effective Federal spending is versus tax cuts in 
creating real private sector job growth.
  Just yesterday, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released 
its review of the spending in the House Democrats' proposed ``economic 
stimulus'' legislation. This CBO review confirms what Republicans have 
been saying all along: the Democrat package won't stimulate the economy 
now when it needs it most.
  The primary reason is, the Democrat plan relies too heavily on slow 
government spending initiatives, not tax cuts to do the job. As seen in 
the chart next to me, even the Democrat stimulus bill proves tax cuts 
impact families and the economy twice as fast as government spending.
  CBO went on to say reductions in Federal taxes would have most of 
their effects in 2009 and 2010, but purchases of good and services, 
either directly or in the form of grants to States and local 
government, would take several years to complete.
  Worse yet, CBO expects that the rate of spending in 2009 would be 
considerably slower than historical rates of spending, and many of the 
larger projects initiated would take up to 5 to 7 years to complete.
  The bottom line is this, Mr. Chairman: The nonpartisan CBO confirms 
that tax cuts get more money into the hands of American families and 
our economy faster than government spending. The American people know 
that tax cuts are a better way to stimulate the economy than borrowing 
money from China just to increase Federal spending and raise the 
Federal deficit.
  If the Speaker was interested in answering the President's call to 
reach a bipartisan American solution to this crisis, she would work 
with Republicans to increase tax relief for every working American.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

[[Page H581]]

  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 3 minutes.
  Mr. Chairman, this has been in many ways a very sad debate. We face 
the prospect of economic collapse. We certainly face the worst economic 
crisis in our lifetime. We have been asked by the President to pass 
legislation that will try to put people back to work by repairing 
schools, by building roads, by developing modern energy grids, and by 
making broadband available to rural America. We have been asked to 
invest in science and technology to make our economy more efficient and 
more productive and more conducive to job growth. And we have been 
asked to invest money to make our health care system less costly and 
more efficient and more open to more people.

                              {time}  2015

  We've also been asked to provide assistance to people who have lost 
their jobs through unemployment insurance, and by helping them to meet 
the cost of education, especially college.
  And we've also been asked to take actions to help stabilize State and 
local budgets so that while we try to expand the economy at the 
national level we aren't shrinking the economy at the State level 
through unfortunate State tax increases or service cutbacks. That's 
what we're trying to do.
  This is serious business. And yet when you look at much of the debate 
that we had today, you would think that we were playing a game of 
Trivial Pursuit. We've had at least 10 Members of this body on the 
other side of the aisle focus on the really big picture by complaining 
about the fact that there is a $50 million appropriation for the arts 
or, can you imagine, because we have the temerity to want to try to 
repair the Jefferson Monument to prevent the plaza on the Mall from 
sinking into the Tidal Basin. It is really sad, indeed.
  I wonder why it's come to this. And then I recall a statement by a 
member of the House Republican leadership in which he advised his 
caucus members to deal with their minority status by behaving like a 
thousand mosquitos and apparently inflicting mosquito bites on the 
majority.
  We've had a lot of Republican talk about bipartisanship, which was 
welcomed; but yet before President Obama even was able to appear before 
the Republican Caucus today we are told in newspaper stories that one 
of the key leaders in the Republican Caucus advised their Caucus even 
before the President came----
  The CHAIR. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. OBEY. I yield myself 2 minutes.
  And yet we're told that the Republican Caucus was advised to vote 
against this bill by one of their leaders.
  I think the public will see through this. It doesn't matter much what 
we say to each other or how we talk to one another. It should, but 
apparently it doesn't. All I can say is we have a serious job before 
us. We have had many ideas expressed for many months, but the time for 
talk is over. We need to make decisions. And right now, like it or not, 
the only comprehensive package before us, the only balanced package 
before us is the one being brought to us in this bill today. And I 
would hope that tomorrow, when we vote on it, that there will be 
significant bipartisan support for that package. I don't know if I have 
any real expectations that will occur or not, but I would certainly 
like to think so.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chair, I would like to address H. Res. 
88, the rule providing for consideration of the ``American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act of 2009'' and the bill itself. I believe the H. Res. 
88 can be supported by every Member of the House.
  Mr. Chair, just yesterday the Associated Press reported that tens of 
thousands of Americans will be losing their jobs. This news was on top 
of the 2.6 million jobs lost last year under the old Bush 
Administration. Some of the biggest names in industry have announced 
layoffs yesterday, from Sprint Nextel, Caterpillar, Home Depot, to GM, 
all of these companies have announced thousands of layoffs.
  Experts believe that without intervention, unemployment will rise to 
8.8 percent, the highest since 1983, and it is reported that the worst 
business conditions in greater than 20 years will exist.
  The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act will result in infusing 
greater than $850 billion into America's ailing economy. With this 
economic recovery plan, there will be 4 million more jobs and an 
unemployment rate that will be 2 percentage points lower by the end of 
2010. Moreover, H. Res. 88 provides for unprecedented accountability 
and transparency measures that are built into the legislation to help 
ensure that tax dollars are spent wisely. $550 billion is strategically 
targeted to priority investments; $275 billion in targeted tax cuts 
will also help spur economic recovery. All of these laudable aims are 
achieved without earmarks. This Act represents the culmination of 
priorities shared with the new Obama administration and is sure to help 
America's economy in the long term.


                               AMENDMENTS

  I would have offered the following four amendments to the underlying 
bill, H.R. 1.


                              AMENDMENT 1

  First, I would have offered several amendments that specifically 
addressed the issue of funding for parklands, either rural or urban in 
the bill. I would have made clear that the funding in the bill in Title 
VIII does not preclude the use of the funding ``for the restoration, 
creation, or maintenance of local and community parks, including urban 
and rural parks.''
  The inclusion of such language would make eminently clear the 
Congress's intent to work on green spaces and the creation of green 
jobs in a new America. This is a priority already articulated by the 
present Obama administration and that would be appropriately mirrored 
here in this legislation.


                              AMENDMENT 2

  Second, I would have offered an amendment that allowed local parks 
and recreation facilities to be provided with $125 million for 
construction, improvements, repair or replacement of facilities related 
to the revitalization of State and local parks and recreation 
facilities under the Land and Water Conservation Act Stateside 
Assistance Program, as amended (16 U.S.C. 4601(4)-(11)), except that 
such funds shall not be subject to the matching requirements in section 
4601-89(c) of that Act:


                              URBAN PARKS

  For construction, improvements, repair, or replacement of facilities 
related to the revitalization of urban parks and recreation facilities, 
$100 million is made available under the Urban Park and Recreation 
Recovery Act of 1978 (16 U.S.C. 2501 et seq.), except that such funds 
shall not be subject to the matching requirements in section 2505(a) of 
the Act: Provided that the amount set aside from this appropriation 
pursuant to section 1106 of this Act shall not be more than 5 percent 
instead of the percentage specified in such section and such funds are 
to remain available until expended. Cities and counties meeting this 
criterion would have to include the required distress factors as part 
of their applications for funding.


                              AMENDMENT 3

  The third amendment that I would have offered would have extended the 
special rule regarding contracting under this bill to all sections of 
the bill.
  The special rule on contracting would provide that each local agency 
that received a grant or money under this Act shall ensure, if the 
agency carries out modernization, renovation, or repair through a 
contract, the process for any such contract ensures the maximum number 
of qualified bidders, including local, small, minority, women- and 
veteran-owned businesses, through full and open competition.
  This amendment is important because it ensures that qualified 
bidders, including local, small, minority, women- and veteran-owned 
businesses, participate in the process through full and open 
competition. This would definitely create jobs and help these 
communities.


                              AMENDMENT 4

  A fourth amendment that I would have offered would have conditioned 
the release of monies to the Department of Justice to prevent 
prosecutorial misconduct. Specifically, the language would have 
prevented the release of money to the Department of Justice unless the 
State did not fund any antidrug task forces for that fiscal year or the 
State had in effect State laws that ensured that:
  (A) a person is not convicted of a drug offense unless the fact that 
a drug offense was committed, and the fact that the person that 
committed that offense, are each supported by separate pieces of 
evidence other than the eyewitness testimony of a law enforcement 
officer or an individual acting on behalf of a law enforcement officer; 
and

  (B) a law enforcement officer does not participate in an anti-drug 
task force unless the honesty and integrity of that officer is 
evaluated and found to be at an appropriately high level.
  While I did not formally offer these amendments, I believe that their 
goals are no less aspirational and that these are indeed good ideas 
that should be included.

                          Oberstar Amendments


                              AMENDMENT 1

  Mr. Chair, I support, and I urge my colleagues to support two 
amendments offered by Chairman Oberstar. First, I would urge my 
colleagues to support Chairman Oberstar's

[[Page H582]]

amendment that any monies appropriated under Title XII be used within 
90 days or the use of such funding will be forfeited. This so-called 
``Use or Lose It'' amendment addresses the issue of job creation and 
the necessity that the Nation must act fast. It is believed that with 
the inclusion of this language entities will act without delay for fear 
of forfeiting access to much needed funds. These monies are critical 
for the renovation and improvement of the Nation's transportation and 
infrastructure and must be expeditiously used to ignite our 
transportation system across the Nation. This infusement of capital 
into the Nation's transportation and infrastructure will surely create 
jobs for Americans.


                              AMENDMENT 2

  Similarly, I support Chairman Oberstar's amendment that would 
authorize $9 billion for use for transportation and Infrastructure 
development, creation, and renovation in America. Frankly, I would 
support increasing the amount to $12 billion because the expansion of 
the Nation's transportation and infrastructure is critically important 
to the expansion of the economy and job creation. I urge my colleagues 
to support this second amendment offered by Chairman Oberstar as well.
  Mr. Chair, given the exigency of the situation and the Nation's 
current economic crisis, I would urge this Committee and my colleagues 
to move this bill quickly to the floor and act without delay. The 
Nation is at a crossroads and is currently sitting in its nadir, as 
some pundits would argue, the Nation's economy needs to be infused with 
capital, critical infrastructure and development, and the American 
people need to employed with real jobs. H.R. 1 does this. It creates 
the development of infrastructure, provides Americans with jobs, and 
tries to correct the economy. I am hopeful that this bill will help 
alleviate the economic woes this country faces.
  As the Obama Administration staked its campaign upon the idea of 
change and won, I believe that America is ready for a change. We are 
ready to be lifted from the doldrums of economic morass. We are ready 
for real change that puts America, its economy, its innovation, and 
entrepreneurial spirit back in its rightful place. I am hopeful and 
confident that H.R. 1 does just that and places America back in the 
spotlight as the sunbeam on the world stage. I strongly urge my 
colleagues to act quickly and support H. Res. 88 as vigorously as I do.
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chair, I am pleased to rise in 
support of the package before the House today, which will help put our 
country on a steady path toward economic recovery.
  I want to thank all of the committees that have worked to put this 
together, particularly the members of the Appropriations Committee and 
its hardworking staff. As Chairman of the Homeland Security 
Appropriations Subcommittee, I have tried to develop proposals Members 
can support with confidence that they will help get our economy moving 
while also making us safer.
  We worked diligently to scrub this bill and to make sure that the 
provisions that we've included would create jobs and put our economy in 
a stronger position for the long haul.
  The bill contains $1.1 billion in new homeland security investments. 
We estimate that this will not only directly create thousands of jobs, 
but will also contribute significantly to improving both security and 
efficiency at our ports of entry and airports. This funding will 
primarily accelerate critical investments that the House has repeatedly 
voted for.
  The recovery package contains $500 million to buy and install 
Aviation Explosive Detection Systems and checkpoint screening systems 
in the Nation's airports, improving security while helping speed the 
flow of travelers through airports. A more efficient transportation 
system will help grease the skids of our Nation's commerce. Funds will 
be competitively awarded based on security risk.
  $150 million is provided to replace and repair Customs and Border 
Protection-owned land ports of entry at the top 10 facilities. This 
will improve border security, facilitate travel and trade, and reduce 
wait times. Once again, it will stimulate commerce by improving the 
transport of goods.
  The package also includes $150 million to enable the Coast Guard to 
alter or remove hazardous bridges and make marine navigation safer and 
more efficient.
  $100 million is provided for non-intrusive inspection devices to 
enhance security at seaports. These new devices will replace aging 
cargo scanning systems to ensure that our security requirements do not 
interrupt the flow of commerce.
  Lastly, this recovery package extends aid to those hit hardest by the 
recent economic crisis through FEMA's Emergency Food and Shelter 
Program. $200 million is included to help local community organizations 
provide food, shelter, and support services to the Nation's hungry, 
homeless, and people in economic crisis. This will provide, among other 
things, 1-month utility payments to prevent service cut-off, and 1-
month rent or mortgage assistance to prevent evictions or to help 
people leave shelters. Funds will be distributed by formula based on 
unemployment and poverty rates.
  This funding has been carefully reviewed to ensure it will help the 
most vulnerable among us, will create new jobs, can be obligated 
quickly, will make our country safer, and will help improve economic 
efficiency. I urge members to support these homeland security 
investments and to vote for this economic recovery package.
  Mr. TOWNS. Mr. Chair, H.R. 1, the American Recovery and Reinvestment 
Act is a critical first step to beginning what will be a long process 
of recovering from our current economic crisis, the likes of which we 
have not seen since the Depression of the 1930s. I am proud to be an 
original cosponsor of this bill.
  Our Nation has already lost 2 million jobs in the current recession, 
and is expected to lose another 3-5 million in the coming year. The 
bill before us targets priority investments in infrastructure, 
education, health care, and energy in an effort to forestall those job 
losses by creating or saving 3-4 million jobs.
  While the need for this economic stimulus package is urgent, clear, 
and compelling, we must also make sure that the money is spent wisely, 
and that waste, fraud, and mismanagement of these funds is kept to an 
absolute minimum. That is why this bill includes provisions that will 
ensure an unparalleled level of oversight, transparency, and 
accountability.
  Over the past few years, Oversight Committee investigations have 
uncovered waste and theft of government dollars on an unprecedented 
scale. Stacks of one-hundred-dollar bills were loaded onto cargo planes 
with forklifts and flown to Iraq--and nobody could say what happened to 
the money. Billions were spent on Katrina contracts, with little to 
show for it. When writing this bill, we worked with Chairman Obey so 
waste and fraud is prevented from the beginning.
  The bill will provide almost $210 million to agency Inspectors 
General and $25 million to the Government Accountability Office to 
ensure vigorous oversight of the programs and activities being funded 
through this bill. It will fund auditors and accountants, and more 
importantly, criminal investigators, to track the funds. The bill also 
creates a Recovery Act Accountability and Transparency Board to review 
management of the funds and provide early warnings of problems.

  The bill requires an unprecedented level of transparency over the 
announcement and award of contracts and grants through a special 
Government Web site. Federal, State, and local officials will be 
required to post this information. Governors and mayors will have to 
certify that any investments funded with recovery act dollars are an 
appropriate use of tax dollars. It is often said that sunshine is the 
best disinfectant. This bill puts that sentiment to work in an 
extraordinarily rigorous way.
  In addition, the bill makes clear that Federal contracts awarded 
using recovery act dollars must comply with the Federal acquisition 
regulation and that fixed-price, competitively awarded contracts are 
used to the greatest extent possible. This will ensure that the 
taxpayer gets the best bang for the buck.
  Contractors and other non-Federal employees are also afforded 
whistleblower protections under this bill. This is critical, since they 
are often our first line of defense against wasteful spending.
  Mr. Chair, this bill is essential to jump-starting our economy and 
providing sustained growth. But it does so in a way which will ensure 
unprecedented accountability and transparency. I urge all Members to 
support it.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. Chair, there is a crisis of confidence in our country. 
Much of it related to the meltdown that has occurred within the 
financial system.
  But there is also an uncertainty on the part of everyday people 
across this country about whether they will be able to maintain the 
basics in their lives. They wonder if the bottom is going to fall out 
from beneath their families.
  People are worried about their jobs and whether they will be able to 
meet the mortgage payment. This bill contains funds to create jobs by 
building roads, sewers, a new electric grid and other needed 
infrastructure. It also contains a tax cut for 95 percent of working 
Americans.
  People are worried about whether they'll have health insurance for 
themselves and their families. This bill provides a 65 percent subsidy 
for COBRA health care coverage for unemployed workers. There is another 
provision that will allow people to qualify temporarily for Medicaid 
until they find another job or alternative health care. It is estimated 
that these two provisions will provide health insurance to more than 8 
million people.
  They are worried about the cutbacks they see happening in education 
and how it will affect their kids. And they wonder if they will be able 
to send their children to college. This bill contains funding for 
States and school districts to prevent deep cuts in critical education 
programs and modernize and repair schools. The

[[Page H583]]

bill also boosts Pell grants by $500 to make college more affordable.
  As much as anything, people are wondering whether the Federal 
Government is going to take action to help them--or will the old 
political divisions keep this Congress from taking effective action to 
help people in their daily lives.
  By passing this bill, we show that we will step up to the plate and 
help address these concerns. This bill is a first step. Other steps 
will be needed, but this recovery package is a good beginning. Vote for 
the bill.
  Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act.
  With unemployment at its highest level in nearly 30 years, millions 
of American are struggling to pay for basic necessities as food, 
housing and health care, it is clear Congress must act.
  In my district, our manufacturers have been hit hard by the crisis in 
the auto industry; our tourism economy has taken a beating as fewer 
Americans can afford to take a vacation; mining and forestry are 
suffering as the demand and price for raw materials has plummeted.
  Unemployment ranges from the national average of 7.2 percent in 
Menominee County to 19 percent in Mackinac County. The Congress must 
act.
  This legislation is not perfect; it is not everything I would put 
into an economic recovery legislation. Still, the Congress must act and 
act without delay!
  My staff and I have been contacted by dozens of local officials from 
across Northern Michigan who have identified more than $360 million in 
road, bridge, water infrastructure and construction projects that could 
help jump start their local economies.
  I expect only a portion of these projects may be funded--but Congress 
must act.
  While I have reservations about this legislation, Congress must act 
to invest in the Americans who need a helping hand, not a hand out.
  Michigan's unemployment rate is at 10.6 percent. We must act to 
extend unemployment benefits to help 3.5 million Americans who have 
exhausted their benefits.
  We must act to increase food stamps to help 31 million Americans, 
half of whom are children.
  We must act to protect health insurance coverage for Americans who 
have lost their jobs and are one illness or sickness away from 
bankruptcy.
  Mr. Chair, this bill is not perfect. But the needs of the millions of 
Americans struggling through this deep recession demands the U.S. 
Congress to act. We must act. I encourage all of my colleagues to join 
me in supporting the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Chair, I support the American Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act and the important first step it takes toward 
reinvigorating our faltering economy. The bill invests critical dollars 
in nearly all major industries and will create more than 4 million jobs 
by the fourth quarter of 2010.
  Over 300,000 jobs will be saved in Florida alone, reducing 
unemployment by 2.4%.
  The $102 billion investment in increased income support will go to 
those families who are feeling the strains of financial pressure the 
most, providing increases in unemployment benefits, food stamps and 
COBRA healthcare.
  Floridians can expect to see over $29.8 million directed to Head 
Start, over $105 million directed to child care and development block 
grants, over $13 million for low-income energy assistance, over $15 
million for elderly nutrition programs, and nearly $9 million aimed for 
preventative health services.
  This will help us ensure that those who have fallen with the economy 
won't be beaten down, but are given the protection and help they need 
to get back up.
  I am proud the bill provides $211 billion in aid to state and local 
governments for vital services such as public education and law 
enforcement.
  My own state of Florida is grappling with significant fiscal 
problems, due in large part to our foreclosure crisis, which has 
resulted in shrinking tax revenue, declining property values and slow 
retail sales.
  I know that this federal aid to state and local governments will help 
fill in the gaps, ensuring our children get the educational support 
they need to complete on the global market. The bill provides over $654 
million for grades K-12 and over $306 million for higher education 
institutions to modernize, maintain and repair their facilities in 
Florida.
  The inclusion of the repeal of the 3% tax withholding on payments 
made to vendors by government entities will also help stimulate our 
economy, relieving small business and local governments from this 
unfair and burdensome requirement. Tax cuts in the stimulus plan will 
help those with the lowest incomes save more of their hard earned 
dollars.
  In Florida this means those from the lowest end of the scale to those 
with middle incomes will see their taxes cut by more than 20% in 2009.
  I am also pleased that the bill uses this opportunity to look 
forward, investing in clean and renewable energy and green 
infrastructure, to create jobs, reduce pollution and help to bring us 
to a clean energy future.
  Mr. Chair, I support this bill and urge its passage.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Chair, I rise today to state for the record the 
intent of the legislative language in the Special Rules section H.R. 
1--American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Title V--Medicaid 
Provisions, Section 5001, subsection (f) STATE INELIGIBILITY AND 
LIMITATION.
  The intent of this language is to ensure that states which had laws 
directing reduced eligibility in their state plan or waiver on or 
before July 1, 2008, not be deemed ineligible to receive the increased 
FMAP that this bill provides, due to subsequent delays when 
implementing those provisions. It was the case in Rhode Island that as 
of July 1, 2008, state law directed and authorized the reduction of 
eligibility in one group of beneficiaries. These provisions were not 
finalized and fully effective until October 1, 2008 due to a delay in 
the implementation of a new extension period for the waiver. The 
language in this special rule allows states which encountered similar 
delays to remain eligible for an enhanced FMAP in this Recovery and 
Reinvestment Act.
  Mrs. CHRISTENSEN. Mr. Chair, I want to thank Chairmen Waxman, Obey 
and Rangel, for their leadership and to thank all of the Ranking 
Members, Committee Members and Staff for this successful effort to 
bring the American Recovery and Reinvestment act of 2009 to the floor 
today so that we may deliver it on schedule to the President's desk. 
This bill, H.R. 1, will not only stimulate our economy, but will also 
do much to heal our Nation.
  As our president has promised, this bill provides an immediate 
investment that will create jobs, but also does so with a look to the 
future so that the jobs created, the infrastructure built, the stronger 
healthcare system created, the technology that is expanded and the 
training and education that is improved, not only provides jobs for 
today but also those we need tomorrow. H.R. 1 will lay a strong 
foundation upon which to create a more stable and vital economy and 
will actually create savings in the future.
  I am proud to support this bill for the very reason some on purely 
political reasons oppose it.
  I support it because it begins to move our country in a new and 
better direction--one which once again supports children and working 
families and begins to lift Americans out of poverty and to expand 
access to quality, comprehensive and culturally and linguistically 
appropriate healthcare to everyone regardless of race, ethnicity, 
gender or geography.
  As a physician and as the Chair of the CBC Health Braintrust, I am 
pleased that this legislation makes the sound and much-needed health 
and health care investments that many of us have been fighting for over 
the past eight years.
  This bill not only invests needed resources into Medicaid, with 
increases for the Territories, it extends the period of COBRA coverage 
to help Americans who have lost their jobs keep their health care 
coverage and increases FMAP to bolster state economic recovery efforts, 
but it also begins to modernize our health care system through the 
widespread implementation of health information technology.
  In H.R. 1 we finally begin to make prevention the priority it needs 
to be--with 3 billion dollars going into a prevention and wellness 
fund, 1.5 billion dollars going into modernizing and expanding health 
care services in community health centers and we finally invest in the 
diversification and expansion of our Nation's health workforce, 
increasing the number of primary care physicians, nurses and other 
health care personnel.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIR. All time for general debate has expired.
  Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Ms. 
Jackson-Lee of Texas) having assumed the chair, Mr. Tierney, Chair of 
the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported 
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1) 
making supplemental appropriations for job preservation and creation, 
infrastructure investment, energy efficiency and science, assistance to 
the unemployed, and State and local fiscal stabilization, for fiscal 
year ending September 30, 2009, and for other purposes, had come to no 
resolution thereon.

                          ____________________