[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 25 (Wednesday, February 16, 2011)]
[House]
[Page H948]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             REGARDING THE REPUBLICAN CONTINUING RESOLUTION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Speier) for 5 minutes.
  Ms. SPEIER. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in opposition to this 
continuing resolution, a continuing resolution that I call the silly, 
the dangerous and the hypocritical. Budgets are more than just numbers. 
They are a statement of our values as a Nation.
  As a Congress, we are faced with several serious challenges: growing 
our economy, putting people back to work, investing in the future, 
reducing the deficit, and ensuring the most vulnerable in our society 
are protected. Judging on that criteria alone, this CR doesn't pass the 
laugh test.
  It would cut 300,000 private sector transportation jobs, ensuring our 
construction workers are receiving unemployment checks instead of 
paychecks. It would stifle our competition. It would stifle 
competitiveness by making Pell Grants less accessible to students and 
families. And it would run roughshod over women, children and the 
environment. With such an extreme proposal, I assume my good friends on 
the Republican side would be coming forward with ideas to improve it. 
But what we've gotten this week is a combination of the silly, the 
dangerous, and the hypocritical.
  In the silly department, we have an amendment preventing funds from 
being used to repair the White House. Now ironically right now, going 
on in the Rayburn Building, are remodeling of hearing rooms that I 
guess the chairmen of these committees have found no need to halt. How 
much money is being spent there?
  Or how about the amendment preventing funds from being used for 
President Obama's teleprompter. Oh, right. We're going to cut $3,000 
from the budget. That's really going to help us. I would expect this 
sort of hyperpartisanship on cable TV, but not in a budget debate.
  Under dangerous, we have: several provisions gutting environmental 
protection, rolling back EPA regulations on clean air and clean water, 
and reducing our investment in clean energy, making America even more 
dependent on foreign oil. How many more solar panels do we want 
manufactured in China?
  How about the amendment undermining a third party testing requirement 
at the Consumer Product Safety Commission? Great. So let's have Chinese 
companies pour in more tainted toys, more lead- and cadmium-filled toys 
for our kids.
  How about the reduction in funding for our first responders, meaning 
there will be less cops and less firefighters in every single 
neighborhood in this country?
  Or how about the amendment preventing funding for the Consumer 
Financial Protection Bureau, meaning big banks can call the shots 
again? Have we learned nothing from the financial meltdown over the 
last 3 years?
  Or how about the unprecedented attack on women's reproductive health 
which will result in more unplanned pregnancies and more abortions; not 
less.
  And finally, the category my colleagues on the Republican side seem 
to relish the most--hypocritical. The party that ran on jobs has 
authored a budget that would increase the unemployment rolls. Asked 
about likely job losses in the CR, Speaker Boehner said, ``Well, so be 
it.'' It's like Marie Antoinette saying, ``Let them eat cake.''
  The party that ran on cutting spending didn't take a scalpel to the 
defense budget; they took a toothpick. In fact, there's another $2.2 
billion in the budget for the V-22 Osprey, which is basically obsolete; 
$495 million for nine Joint Strike Fighters; and $450 for a second 
engine that the military defense budget doesn't want.
  And the party that ran on fiscal responsibility has offered a budget 
that will balloon the deficit by continuing tax cuts for the 
millionaires and billionaires that don't need them.
  I agree with President Obama, that we must out-innovate, out-educate 
and out-build the rest of the world. While not perfect, the budget he 
released this week will take an important step in that direction. As 
for the silly, the dangerous and the hypocritical CR we are considering 
today, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no.''
  Budgeting is a serious process, and what we're doing this week is 
unserious at least.

                          ____________________