[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 184 (Friday, December 2, 2011)]
[House]
[Pages H8120-H8122]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BUDGETARY AND OTHER CONCERNS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is recognized
for 30 minutes.
Mr. GOHMERT. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We're in a time of massive overspending, a time when some want to
raise taxes, creating more of an economic problem. But it's been
shocking that after the biggest wave election since the 1930s, 80-plus
brand-new Republican conservative Members coming into this House, it's
been nearly a year, and we really haven't cut much of anything. There's
plenty of places to do it. It should be done. It can be done.
We ought to just say we're going back to the last Speaker Pelosi
budget before the big bailouts and stimulus all started occurring. I
don't remember governmental entities around the country, Federal
Government entities, in 2007 and 2008 with Speaker Pelosi at the helm
of things, complaining that they weren't getting enough Federal money.
Yet, if we went back there and just said, you know what, forget the
stimuluses and the bailouts, obviously those haven't worked. Let's just
go back to the '07 or '08 budget. They didn't pass a budget; they
passed appropriations--but let's go back to those numbers. Instantly, a
trillion dollars trimmed off.
What we've had is a President of the United States coming into office
jumping up the Federal spending by a trillion to a trillion and a half
dollars and then saying we're not cutting any of that extra trillion
dollars we've added on. We just need now to raise taxes to get up to
all of this giveaway spending that we've done.
There are many good examples of that, but none better than in the
solar energy area--a place like Solyndra getting between five and $600
million that's been completely wasted.
We've been told by Secretary Napolitano that the country just can't
afford to build a fence on our southern border where our problems now
are not Latin American citizens coming up here. We have what are
sometimes labeled OTMs, ``other than Mexicans,'' coming in; and many of
them are coming in and they're not coming in to do us any favors, and
they're not coming here to get jobs.
We have an obligation to provide for the common defense. Our oath
requires us to do that, and we're not doing it.
But good grief, if you took the money that this administration
squandered giving away to Solyndra, take the $700 million or so that
was squandered, given away to a solar plant in Nevada--actually they
had about $35 billion to give away, they literally have been doing--and
according to the information from this administration--some of us think
it shouldn't cost nearly this much--but if you took just $1 billion to
$2 billion of that $35 billion that had been squandered by this Energy
Department and said we're committed to providing for the common
defense, and in providing for the common defense we're going to build a
fence, it would cost a fraction of what this administration has
squandered on solar energy giveaway programs. What a waste.
Then we have ObamaCare. You want to save a trillion dollars? Just
stop it. Repeal ObamaCare. The vast majority of American people sent a
new majority into the House to try to get that done. Turns out, we've
got to have help in the Senate we don't have down there so that we can
do the will of the majority of the American public and repeal
ObamaCare. There's a trillion dollars in savings, actually more than
that.
We've got $105 billion being spent right now, in the process of being
spent, to make sure that the mechanisms are in place so that by 2013,
2014, ObamaCare is going to be the law of the land whether the Supreme
Court strikes it down or not, because all of these mechanisms will be
in place. It's time to repeal it. It's time to get rid of it and have
serious health care reform.
And you can't have serious health care reform until you know what the
cost of health care is. You can't go into any doctor's office or any
hospital, any health care provider's office and say how much does it
cost for this procedure, that procedure if it is something that's
covered by insurance or Medicare or Medicaid because they can't tell
you. It depends, they'll tell you. What kind of insurance you got? Are
you on Medicare? Medicaid? Are you paying cash?
Ironically, in a society where paying cash should normally get you
the lesser price, in health care, because of some of the insurance
agreements, they are not allowed contractually to charge as little to
the cash-paying people as those who have insurance get charged to their
insurance companies.
{time} 1450
Well, that's not the free market. That's not competition. So that's
something that has to be dealt with. We need transparency there.
When we look at the figures, for example, on Medicare for the
calendar year of 2010, it has been estimated that $522.8 billion was
spent on Medicare. When you divide the number of households in the
United States that have been estimated to have one or more people on
Medicare, you'll find out we're apparently spending between $20,000 and
$30,000 a household for Medicare. You can buy some really great private
health insurance, especially if you have a high deductible, for a lot
less than $20,000 a year.
That's why the proposal I had--some have called it bipartisan--has
clearly become a partisan entity. After being called to the woodshed by
this current President, they were able to strike about $200 billion or
$300 billion from their estimated costs of ObamaCare only to find, once
it passed, it got put back in. Well, if CBO has a margin of error of
$300 billion out of every $1 trillion they estimate, then it's probably
not something we ought to keep. It's kind of like the Energy
Department. When they're that bad at what they do, it's time to get rid
of them and do something new.
But you can't blame the folks who are there. Their hands were tied
with rules that were put in place in 1974 up until the last 5 or 6
years with the most liberal Congress in our history, the same Congress
that said we weren't going to stay with our commitments to allies in
Southeast Asia. We left, some estimate, 2 million people to be killed
when we fled Southeast Asia. Now this President seems to be following
the same trends that we saw with Jimmy Carter: turning on our allies,
hurting our friends, helping our enemies--and there's always a price to
be paid for that.
So we've got ObamaCare put in place. Over $1 trillion could be saved.
Just repeal the thing, and let's start with real reform.
Even though CBO refused to score it, Newt Gingrich told me, if I
could get that bill scored, it might revolutionize the discussion on
health care. So, naturally, CBO wouldn't score something like that even
after they were requested by the ranking Republican on Energy and
Commerce--the committee of jurisdiction--and by the ranking Republican
on the Joint Committee on Taxation. They both requested it be scored,
but CBO didn't score it. It might have interfered with ObamaCare being
passed. The bottom line was it would have given seniors a choice.
Do you want to keep being on Medicare and have the Federal Government
tell you what you can or can't have, and have to go out and, with the
precious few dollars you have from Social
[[Page H8121]]
Security, have to pay AARP or somebody else's Medigap insurance or
wraparound insurance or supplemental insurance? Do you want to have to
keep paying precious dollars?
Or would you like the alternative of having the Federal Government
buy you basically the best private insurance you could have with a high
deductible--of $3,500, $5,000, whatever we want to say, whatever ends
up being the most cost-effective--and we would give you cash in a
health savings account that you'd control with your own debit card,
where you'd make the decisions? The only restriction is it would have
to be for health care. You couldn't use that money for anything else.
Give people a choice. Let them decide if they want to quit buying
Medigap insurance.
I know, as wonderful as AARP is, 2 years ago, I think, they cleared
over $400 million in clear profit from their supplemental Medicare
insurance. So you hate to cut in on a charitable institution like
AARP's massive profits like that off people who can't afford to buy the
product. But gee, let's give seniors a choice.
Then, of course, we would need to give incentives to young people.
Put your own money into a health savings account. It would be your
money, but it could only be used for health care. You can't pull it out
for something that's not health care. You can gift it to other people's
health savings accounts. When you pass away, if you've got money in
there, you can pass that on and have someone inherit that from you into
that person's HSA, but once it's committed as health savings account
money, it has to be spent on health care.
Yet we've been told if that happens, then the vast majority of young
people in their twenties and thirties would have so much massive
amounts of money built up by the time they'd be eligible for Medicare,
not only would they not want Medicare, they wouldn't need it. They'd
have plenty of money to do what they wished.
Now, that would get us off this road to the dustbin of history,
because we have bankrupted ourselves on entitlement programs. At the
same time, what an incredible deal--you'd get better health care; you'd
get more control; you'd put patients back in control; you'd put
patients and doctors back making the decisions.
I'm a big supporter of health insurance, but the trouble is for a
number of years now we haven't had health insurance in America; we've
had health management. I'm very concerned that, unless health insurance
companies get back in the business of health insurance instead of
health management, then there will be some bill that ends up running
them out of business.
It, of course, will be ObamaCare if it's not repealed. Then it will
be the government controlling things--a massive takeover.
As I've said before, ObamaCare is kind of like the cap-and-trade
bill. They're all about the same thing. It's all about the GRE--the
Government Running Everything. That's what it's about.
We could save money and return freedom to people who have not had it
in the area of health care, and they would control their destinies. But
there are some people here in Washington who genuinely, honestly
believe they need to be making the personal decisions for people across
America because, gee, they're smarter, and they would make better
personal decisions for people who haven't done so well on their own.
Thinking like that caused the original Revolution. They didn't want
some king who thought he knew more about what they should do with their
lives making the decisions about their personal lives. Some have drawn
the parallel that there is a correlation between the American
Revolution and the French Revolution when compared to the Tea Party
movement and the Occupy Wall Street movement, because the American
Revolution was about one thing: It was about liberty.
There were people who signed and pledged their lives, their fortunes,
their sacred honor. They were all at stake. And many who signed,
pledging their lives, their fortunes, their sacred honor, lost their
lives and their fortunes--but their sacred honor was intact when they
died.
The Declaration of Independence says we are endowed by our Creator
with certain unalienable rights and that among those are life, liberty,
and the pursuit of happiness.
Nobody is guaranteed happiness. Yet the Founders knew that we were
endowed by our Creator with these rights. But like any endowment, like
any inheritance that's passed on from a loving father, if you're not
willing to fight for it to the death, if necessary, you will not keep
your inheritance. If you make stupid decisions with your endowment,
with your inheritance, you're going to lose it; you won't keep it.
Many countries have suspected they were endowed by their Creator with
unalienable rights, but they didn't fight to preserve them. They never
fought to grasp them to begin with, and they've never had them.
{time} 1500
Some have had them and squandered them. We have been given such a
gift by our Creator and by those who were willing to defend our
inheritance so that we could enjoy that incredible endowment. Of
course, we find out that there are some people in the Occupy movement
who have big trust funds, massive amounts of money to keep them going,
and they're out there complaining about people with money, got their
laptops or their iPads, don't appear to be hurting too much. It appears
some of them were born on third base and have gone through life
thinking they hit a triple. Well, they haven't, and they need to be
grateful for the people that got them to third base, but they're not.
We can get spending under control, but we've got to get back to a
moral Nation. As the Founders said, this government was never intended
to work as a government for immoral people, for a people who did not
grasp and understand the gift from their Creator, and that they had a
Creator.
We know that there are those who, in this country, are atheists
because they have the freedom to do that, and that's fine. They have
the freedom of religion, but the late Bob Murphy from Nacogdoches,
Texas, used to say, you know, I used to feel sorry for atheists, he
said. I do, I feel sorry for atheists because they have to tell the
world, while they're trying to act like intellectuals, they have to try
to tell the world that they believe the equation nobody plus nothing
equals everything.
As Bob used to say, how embarrassing, to act like an intellectual and
say I believe the equation, nobody plus nothing equals everything.
Because the truth is, we were endowed by our Creator. It didn't just
happen. These incredible gifts didn't just appear. We are endowed by a
loving Creator.
I learned a lot about the nature of God as a father who loved his
children. I learned even more about the nature of God as a judge and
chief justice, how you don't want to punish people. You got a taste of
that as a father. But there has to be laws, there has to be
enforcement, there has to be equal enforcement and people not be above
the law.
Well, when you get people in positions of authority who think they're
above the law, that they should be in a position, as was King George
III, to decide legislative, judicial and executive decisions, we're in
trouble.
In North Dakota, there has been the largest oil find since the
discoveries in Alaska. Some think the shale finds of oil in North
Dakota may even exceed Prudhoe Bay. It's big.
We, those of us who believe in God, should be thanking God for the
endowment of all the natural resources in this country. We have been
richly blessed, and yet we have got an administration that says hands
off: this might make us energy independent, this might move us down the
road to stop sending money to countries that hate us, to stop sending
money to countries who are funneling money to terrorism.
This energy resource blessing that we've been given, if we used it,
would create jobs; but we're not going to allow it because we want to
use something they call alternative energy. The reason, as someone
recently said, it is called alternative energy is because it isn't real
energy. You use more energy getting the energy out than you actually
get back.
That's been seen with wind energy; and we know that these massive
windmills, though producing some small amount of electricity, they've
chopped up a lot of birds in the process.
[[Page H8122]]
And yet what has been this administration's position in response to
the biggest oil find in modern history in North Dakota, Slawson
Exploration Co. of Wichita, Kansas, was charged under the Migratory
Bird Treaty Act for killing 12 birds that--these aren't endangered
species, they're migratory birds, like mallard ducks--after landing,
allegedly landing in oil waste pits in western North Dakota.
So our Justice Department, which abandoned prosecution of funding of
terrorism around the world against the United States and our friend
Israel, it has abandoned that responsibility, they are purging their
training records of any reference to radical Islam. They are refusing
to go after the people that want to bring down this country. They're
appointing people on the Homeland Security Advisory Council who have
glowingly talked about Ayatollah Khomeini, or the Holy Land Foundation,
that funneled money to terrorism, they're putting people like that on
the Homeland Security Advisory Council, giving them secret clearance
and letting them peruse our classified documents. That's what this
administration has been doing.
But these energy resources could make us energy independent, and what
are they doing? They're putting their foot on the throat of anybody
that tries to produce them to the point that they will ignore the tens
of thousands of birds that have been killed by windmills and go after
the biggest oil find in modern history in America and charge them
criminally because maybe there were 12 ducks that got into some of
their oil.
It's incredible what this administration is doing--they think to help
America. But, clearly, just as clearly in retrospect as President
Carter hurt this country, hurt those who love liberty by recognizing
the Ayatollah Khomeini as a man of peace, proudly proclaiming his
coming back to Iran, and thousands and thousands and thousands of
people have died because such a man was encouraged to come to power.
Just like this administration did in Egypt, like this administration
has done in Libya, without really knowing who we were helping, and now
the Muslim Brotherhood that is devout in pursuing an international
caliphate that would put the lovers of liberty in this country under
the shackles of following sharia law, it's a disgrace.
There is so much damage that this administration has been doing; the
Justice Department going after people because they believe there is a
God.
I will just close with what Ben Franklin said in the Constitutional
Convention, 1787, toward the end of June:
How has it happened that we have not once thought of humbly
applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our
understanding? In the beginning of the contest with Great
Britain when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayer
in this room. Our prayers, sir, were heard and they were
graciously answered.
He ultimately said:
If a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice,
is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid? We've
been assured, sir, in the sacred writings that ``unless the
Lord build the house, they labor in vain that build it.'' I
firmly believe this.
He also said:
I firmly believe that without his concurring aid, we shall
succeed in our political building no better than the builders
of Babel.
He was right. We've had over 200 years of blessing as a result. It's
time to acknowledge the result of our blessing and the source of our
blessings.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________