[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 6 (Wednesday, January 18, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H46-H53]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H. RES. 515, ADDRESSING A MOTION TO
PROCEED UNDER SECTION 3101A OF TITLE 31, UNITED STATES CODE
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the
Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 515 and ask for its
immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 515
Resolved, That a motion to proceed with regard to a joint
resolution of disapproval specified in subsection (a)(2) of
section 3101A of title 31, United States Code--
(a) may be offered even if the joint resolution has not
been reported to the House as contemplated by subsection
(c)(3) of such section; and
(b) shall be in order only if offered by the Majority
Leader or his designee.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from South Carolina is
recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. For the purpose of debate only, I yield
the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis),
pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During
consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose
of debate only.
General Leave
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their
remarks.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from South Carolina?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. The Budget Control Act of 2011, which
was enacted into law on August 2, 2011, authorized increases in the
administration's borrowing authority subject to a joint resolution of
disapproval. The law provides for consideration of a joint resolution
of disapproval with 2 hours of debate. Amendments to the joint
resolution are not permitted under the law. H. Res. 515 allows the
House to consider the resolution of disapproval in the House today,
rather than tomorrow, as currently contemplated in the law. Simply put,
we are moving up its consideration by 1 day to better accommodate the
House floor schedule.
I rise today in support of this rule and the underlying resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I stand before you posing two very, very important
questions. The first is an issue of scale.
Where I come from in North Charleston, South Carolina, we have a
little trouble digesting exactly what $1.2 trillion really means. To
help get my own head around the number $1.2 trillion, I did a little
factfinding. A last-minute flight from Charleston, South Carolina, to
Washington, D.C., is about $1,100. You could fly back and forth every
single day for the next 3 million years in order to spend $1.2
trillion. I'm not sure about anyone else in the Chamber, but there
aren't too many things I'm planning to do for the next 3 million years.
Now that we have a little perspective on what $1.2 trillion really
means, the second question is a simple one: Why is it so hard to say we
can't afford it? It's a simple question. Why is it so hard to say that
we can't afford another $1.2 trillion of debt?
I asked the same question on my Facebook. Here are two responses to
the question:
What's not to understand? Just cut the darned budget just like the
rest of us have to do.
We the people, on an individual level, have got to demand less
government. It's called courage, the courage to just say ``no.''
{time} 1240
So, Mr. Speaker, it's bad enough that through the national health
care bill, the Democrats raised taxes on the middle class by $500
billion and then they raised another half a trillion dollars for
Medicare, but now they want to borrow $1.2 trillion. From whom--it's a
good question--from whom? Unborn Americans, unborn Americans and
foreign nations in order to continue borrowing 42 cents on every dollar
to spend in 2012.
It's just not right, Mr. Speaker. The American people will not stand
for the blank check culture of the past and I, for one, stand with the
American people.
Once again, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this rule and the
underlying legislation. I encourage my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on
this rule and ``yes'' on the underlying bill.
[[Page H47]]
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to thank my colleague for yielding me the customary 30
minutes, and I rise today in opposition to the rule and the bill.
Mr. Speaker, what exactly are we doing here? We could be talking
about creating jobs for the middle class. We could be talking about a
payroll tax cut extension. We could be talking about corporate tax
reform, individual tax reform, and most importantly, we could be
talking about solving the national deficit, about reducing government
spending, about solving the deficit issue.
But, instead, we're here playing this game of Kabuki theater. Rather
than pursuing an agenda that isn't a Democratic or Republican agenda,
but an American agenda that both sides all can agree on, we're here
playing a counterproductive and absurd game. In fact, not only playing
a game, we're replaying a game.
We all remember the debt debacle last August that almost shut down
Federal Government and led to a downgrade, potentially increasing
interest rates and costing the government billions or hundreds of
billions of dollars more in interest payments. For the first time in
history, Standard & Poor's downgraded our country's credit rating,
citing brinksmanship and political gridlock as motivating factors for
their decision.
Look, this is all Monday night quarterbacking. It's after the fact.
The money has been spent. The money has been spent, and 147 Republicans
voted in December to spend $915 billion in the appropriations bill, the
omnibus appropriations bill, 147 Republicans, $915 billion, all of
which was deficit spending. One hundred forty-seven Republicans spent
$915 billion in deficit spending December 17th. That's a Christmas
shopping spree, and now the credit card bill has come in January, and
here they are saying we don't want to pay that credit card bill.
The answer, Mr. Speaker, is not to spend the money if you're not
going to make good on your bill. Every American family knows that. Once
the money's spent it's after-the-fact political finger pointing, not
looking to a solution for a deficit problem.
And the Republicans have not put a solution on the table. Even the
House Republican budget, the Paul Ryan budget that ends Medicare,
creates $5.1 trillion in deficit spending over the next 10 years, $5.1
trillion in deficit spending. How many times will the Republicans have
to raise the debt limit to have a deficit of $5.1 trillion?
This Congress and the majority of this Congress on the Republican
side are addicted to spending, Mr. Speaker, and until they are willing
to entertain a real discussion--and the President of the United States,
President Obama, has led the way by convening a commission, the Bowles-
Simpson Commission, to try to take a bipartisan approach to actually
solving the deficit situation. But rather than bringing any of those
bills before the House, the Republicans passed the budget that not only
ends Medicare but leads to $5.1 trillion in deficit spending and as
recently as December 17th, spent $915 billion of deficit spending, the
entire deficit for this year, essentially, around December 17th,
because we had already spent the money that actually came in. And here
they are in January, Mr. Speaker, saying they don't want to pay the
bills.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I find it quite interesting
to hear Mr. Polis, who sounds like a good Republican over there, I must
concede, sounds like a good Republican over there talking about
excessive spending.
But here's the question, the Democratic-controlled Senate hadn't
passed the budget, next Tuesday, in a thousand days, and it's laughable
that someone on the left would talk about deficit spending since the
three records on deficit spending have occurred in the last three
cycles, FY 2009 a $1.4 trillion deficit and FY 2010, $1.294 trillion
deficit. Under President Obama in 2011, a 1.299--let's just round it to
$1.3 trillion in deficit spending.
Mr. POLIS. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. No, sir, but I yield 3 minutes to my
good friend from South Carolina (Mr. Wilson).
Mr. WILSON of South Carolina. I thank the gentleman for yielding, and
I appreciate the leadership of Congressman Tim Scott on this very
important issue.
As South Carolina votes in the Presidential primary on Saturday, our
State is grateful for the leadership of Congressman Tim Scott, along
with my other colleagues who are on the floor today, Jeff Duncan, Trey
Gowdy, Mick Mulvaney.
We know that in November of last year, our Nation's annual debt
reached $15 trillion and it recently exceeded the value of the entire
American economy. Washington's out-of-control borrowing and spending
must stop.
The President has ignored our Nation's spending problem and once
again asked Congress to increase the debt ceiling by $1.2 trillion.
This request is a chilling reminder of the out-of-control debt which
threatens senior citizens' retirement security and saddles young people
with a mountain of debt. The President in February of 2009 said the
deficit is unsustainable, but then he proceeded to double the year's
debt and has since.
Our Nation's unemployment rate has consistently remained above 8
percent for 35 months. This is tragic for American families.
Instead of offering solutions to reduce spending and decrease taxes
to encourage economic growth, the President and the liberal controlled
Senate continue to support legislation calling for massive tax
increases and funding for programs that contribute to our growing
national deficit, which destroys jobs and hurts American small
businesses.
Americans have made it clear they expect their elected officials to
make meaningful fiscal reforms today so as not to burden future
generations with crushing deficits and debts tomorrow.
House Republicans have remained committed to our projects by fighting
to create jobs and promote job growth in the private sector. Last year,
House Republicans passed 35 job-creating bills, most with bipartisan
support. Instead of acting on these bills to create jobs, the liberal
controlled Senate refuses to consider most of these pieces of
legislation.
By passing today's resolution that disapproves of the President's
authority to increase the debt limit, Congress can help restore the
American people's faith in our Nation's government by protecting future
generations and limiting Washington's out-of-control borrowing and
spending. Instead of giving the President more power to spend more
money we do not have, Congress should work together to find ways to
reduce spending and put America back on the path to fiscal
responsibility just as Congressman Scott has pointed out families do.
I encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this resolution.
Mr. POLIS. I yield myself 30 seconds.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from South Carolina complained about the
President's budget, he complained about a lack of budget in the Senate.
What he failed to acknowledge is that the budget the Republicans
adopted in this body without a single Democratic vote not only ends
Medicare, but leads to $5.1 trillion in deficit spending over the next
10 years, several times the deficit over the last 10 years; $5.1
trillion, a larger deficit spending than this country has ever had in a
10-year period, was supported and voted on and enacted by the
Republicans in this House.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
(Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ANDREWS. I thank my friend for yielding.
Mr. Speaker and colleagues, as the Congress meets for the first time
in 2012, the people of the country are burdened by a deficit of jobs, a
deficit in our Federal budget, and a deficit of hope that things could
get better.
{time} 1250
It is our responsibility to work together to try to make them better.
Now, to reduce the deficit of the country, yes, you should restrain
spending. The parties came together in August and passed--with about
half of each party voting for it--a deficit-reduction
[[Page H48]]
plan that cut spending in our departments by about 5 percent each, made
reasonable reductions in defense spending and some reasonable
reductions in social problems. We should keep those reductions on the
books.
We think that in reducing the deficit, that the very wealthiest and
most successful in American society should have to pay a little bit
more of their fair share. Not everyone agrees with that, but we think
that is an important part of reducing the deficit. But by far the best
way to reduce the deficit is to create jobs for the people of this
country. You have a hard time creating jobs when there is a deficit,
but you have an impossible time of reducing the deficit when there are
no jobs.
132 days ago, the President of the United States came to this Chamber
and put forward four good ideas to create jobs in this country. First,
he said that we should cut taxes for middle class and working
Americans. Well, we managed to eke out a 2-month agreement to do that.
Let's get to work today in extending that middle class tax cut for at
least the rest of the year.
The President then said that we should put people back to work,
building science labs in our schools and fixing bridges and roads that
need to be repaired. The Congress hasn't acted on that proposal at all
in this House.
The President said that we should cut taxes for small business people
who hire people, who create jobs. This House has not acted at all on
that proposal since September 8. The President took due note that as
private sector jobs have risen, police officers and teachers and
firefighters have lost their jobs in the public sector. And he said to
help our States and cities keep police officers on the beat, keep
firefighters in the apparatus, keep teachers in the classroom, let's
give some aid to those States and cities to keep those people working.
The House has not acted at all on that proposal.
Ladies and gentlemen of the House and Mr. Speaker, rather than going
through an exercise here where people can pontificate about how much
they deeply care about the deficit, let's do something about it. Let's
put on the floor of this House each of the President's proposals to
create jobs and let's take a vote.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. POLIS. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. ANDREWS. And to those who say they have better ideas, let's put
their ideas on the floor. The American people did not take the month of
January off; neither should we. Let's put these job-creating proposals
on the floor, put them to a vote and do our job to help put the
American people back to work.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, one of the comments by my
good friend, Mr. Polis from Colorado, was that Republicans were trying
to end Medicare. That's a laughable comment. As a matter of fact, it is
so laughable that hot off the press, the PolitiFact, which finds out
whether or not there is truth or not in words: The political lie of the
year is that Republicans voted to end Medicare. PolitiFact just named
the political lie of the year the comment that Republicans voted to end
Medicare.
Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina
(Mr. Duncan).
Mr. DUNCAN of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to ask my
colleagues to support House Joint Resolution 98 denying this President
the trillion-dollar draw on the Nation's line of credit. You know, just
because you've got the credit limit that you've asked for doesn't mean
you have to max out the credit card.
How dare this President come back for another increase in the
Nation's debt after the failure of the supercommittee. How dare he.
This President did everything he could and successfully stopped the
committee from producing any kind of cut to the size and scope of
government, and now he wants to kick the can further down the road yet
again. Another year, another trillion dollars in debt, Mr. Speaker.
What has this administration done to stop the deficit spending that
fuels the debt and brings about the need for an increase in the debt
ceiling? Nothing. Mr. Speaker, this administration has done absolutely
nothing to rein in this Federal Government.
This is the same President whose party controls the other body. And
on Tuesday, the United States Senate will mark 1,000 days since they
last passed a budget, the same day the President delivers his State of
the Union address. What an embarrassment, to continuously ask for more
debt without even pretending to know how you've budgeted. If this were
a private business, it would be bankrupt.
This President and, sadly, this Congress continues to mortgage the
futures of our children and grandchildren, drowning them in a sea of
debt. After the failed policy of the President's stimulus package, we
are swimming in deficit spending of this President's making.
Mr. Speaker, our country stands over $15 trillion in debt, and after
this increase we'll be over $16 trillion in the red. Congratulations.
We've now joined the club of nations whose national debt is larger than
our annual national economic output. This is simply an unsustainable
position, and the only way we will get our debt under control is to
stop the insanity of trillion dollar a year deficit spending. This must
stop, and we in this House must be the responsible adults in the room
to stop it. Now is not the time to go get another increase in the
limit. Now is the time for us to cut up the credit card and buckle
down, like millions of American families are doing across this great
land. In an economy this difficult, American families have had to
tighten their belts, get back to basics, and cut things from their
budget. Surely now is the time for the Federal Government to do the
same.
Mr. Speaker, I understand the politics here. We'll thump our chests
and we'll pass this resolution and we'll say we've done all we can to
stop this increase. The other body, led by a party bent on destroying
the American dream and taking us down the path of economic ruin to
ever-greater government dependency, will table this. In the end, the
President will get his increase. And we'll spend yet another trillion
dollars that our children do not have. But the bill is coming due, Mr.
Speaker, and sooner or later we're going to have to stop this debt
train from derailing our country. God bless America.
Mr. POLIS. Before further yielding, I yield myself a minute.
Mr. Speaker, to hear the other side, they doth protest too much. Why
does a party for whom 147 Members voted to spend $915 billion, causing
the deficit, which is roughly a trillion dollars in size, essentially
that $915 billion that they spent on their Christmas spending spree was
the deficit, now they're complaining about it?
And since the gentleman from South Carolina wasn't kind enough to
yield to me, I'd like to ask him on my own time, the gentleman referred
to whether or not ending Medicare was true, and obviously there's been
a vital discussion about that, but the other assertion that I made is a
very factual one, and I just want to confirm with the gentleman that
the Paul Ryan Republican budget that the Republicans passed did indeed
contain $5.1 trillion of deficit spending. Is that your understanding
as well? Is that true?
I yield to the gentleman from South Carolina for an answer.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. I do remember that the Paul Ryan budget
came in at a number of $1.19 trillion in overall spending for the
annual year. If you're talking about the 10-year impact of the Paul
Ryan budget--
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. POLIS. I yield myself an additional 30 seconds.
The 10-year figure for that deficit from the CBO itself, $5.1
trillion in deficit spending. And again, the same Republicans who spend
$915 billion here in December are again saying now that the credit card
bill has come due, they somehow don't want to pay it.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield 3 minutes to the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. I thank the gentleman from Colorado.
I'd like to tell a fairy tale and the true story of the American
people. The fairy tale, of course, is why we're here on the floor even
today to actually tell a little story to the American people that we
are doing something to impact the deficit.
The bill we passed in August, of course, responded to the need to
raise
[[Page H49]]
the debt ceiling to pay America's bills. But in order to cajole and
drag our friends, the Republicans on the other side of the aisle, they
did things like cut Pell Grants. They required the joint select
committee that did not work to reduce the deficit. And, of course, they
wanted us to have these shenanigans on the floor so that the American
people could think they're doing their job.
But here's the real story of the American people. First of all, the
debt that was increased that we are now dealing with, $1.9 trillion was
raised under Ronald Reagan; $1.5 trillion was raised under George Bush;
Bill Clinton, $1.4 trillion; and George W. Bush, $6.1 trillion.
What is the raising of the debt ceiling, which I think most Americans
care about. It is responding to the debt that is now held by the
public. It is doing our job. It is responding to the fact that the
public should not burden America not paying her bills. What kind of
bills? Debts that are owed to individuals, to our corporations that our
friends say are of great friendship to them--banks and insurance
companies; but most importantly, pensions, mutual funds. State and
local governments will be left holding the bag because today we want to
do a few shenanigans.
{time} 1300
Mr. Speaker, let me tell you that the Kaiser Foundation has indicated
in my own State that 5.6 million Texans are living in poverty--2.2
million of them children. And 17.4 percent of the households in the
State struggle with food insecurity. Not raising the debt ceiling means
that the burden falls on those who get up every morning to work. That's
a true story of the American people.
What else will happen if we don't raise the debt ceiling? 642,500
jobs will be lost. The gross domestic product will decrease by 1
percent. Unemployment would go up. Every mortgage would increase by
$19,175. Stocks would fall. The S&P dropping 6.3 percent. And every
401(k) holder would lose $8,816.
This is the real story of the American people. I want to stand on
their side. I want to acknowledge that together as Republicans and
Democrats, rather than writing the fairy tale story that you're seeing
today, a resolution of disapproval, we can really work together as we
have done in years past. 1997--the balanced budget amendment that
created the Children's Health Insurance Program, helping children
across America to be able to have health insurance. Or get rid of
Medicare part D, passed by the past administration and the Republican
Congress. Medicare part D, any senior will tell you, is one of the most
devastating parts of their budget, causing them to pay three times more
for their prescription drugs. We can get rid of that, as the Affordable
Care Act did, and we would generate millions and millions of dollars.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. POLIS. I yield the gentlewoman an additional 30 seconds.
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Fairy tales are supposed to end with a
wonderful ending, something such as never, never again or it ended
happily thereafter. Well, let me tell you the true story of the
American people. They don't want us on the floor today talking about
not paying their bills to them. They want us on the floor right now to
create jobs, to bring down the unemployment, to give them payroll tax
relief, and to give extension for unemployment for those who are
seeking jobs. And they don't want us to deny food stamps to young
soldiers whose incomes don't allow them to provide for their families.
They want us to get to work. Here I am. I'm ready to get to work.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Sullivan).
Mr. SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House Joint
Resolution 98, a resolution that would prevent President Obama from
raising the debt ceiling by $1.2 trillion.
This is a critical time for our Nation. Over 14 million Americans are
unemployed, and our record-setting level of debt is more than $15
trillion. The fact is the Obama administration will not lead on this
debt reduction issue. I believe it is critical we send a message that
we will not return to the era of continuing to run up the American
taxpayers' credit card and endless increases to our Nation's debt
limit.
Let's look at President Obama's record. Since assuming office in
2009, President Obama has proposed consecutive budgets that offer more
than $1 trillion in deficit spending, the most of any President in our
Nation's history. And under the President's budget plans, in 2018 the
United States will owe more interest on the debt than will be spent on
all defense spending, meaning we will owe more money to our creditors
than supporting our national defense. That is crazy.
Congress has a moral obligation to our children and grandchildren to
stop the outrageous spending and restore fiscal sanity in Washington to
ensure we don't leave them under a mountain of debt. Right now, every
American faces $200,000 in financial obligations to pay for our debt,
and this is unacceptable. This resolution of disapproval is a good
place to start in getting our fiscal house in order, and I urge my
colleagues to support it.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds before further
yielding.
Every Republican that has spoken on this issue voted for a budget
that included $5.1 trillion in deficit spending over a decade, more
deficit spending than any 10-year period in the history of our country.
They also, as part of that budget, voted for raising the debt ceiling
by $8.8 trillion. They voted to do it, Mr. Speaker. They voted to raise
the debt ceiling from $14.3 trillion to $23.1 trillion by 2021. Yes,
Mr. Speaker, every Republican in this body, except for four, and zero
Democrats, voted to double the national debt over the next 10 years.
I'm proud to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Connolly).
Mr. CONNOLLY of Virginia. I thank my friend. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It's winter in Washington, but apparently our Republican friends have
returned thinking it's August at the beach, and they've packed their
neon-colored flip-flops.
Last year, this Congress came together in a bipartisan fashion to
avoid America's first-ever default. The business community, economists,
financial analysts warned of the economic calamity that a default would
cause. Passing this resolution today--in fact by two-thirds vote in
this body and the Senate--would produce just such a catastrophic
result.
The Budget Control Act we passed didn't appropriate one penny of new
spending; it just provided for America to meet its previous
obligations. Although the initial intransigence of some brought the
Nation to the brink and the first downgrading by S&P in our history,
ultimately 174 Republicans finally agreed to do the right thing.
Today's vote is a direct repudiation of that vote. The debt limit
increase in this resolution is the exact same one they supported as
part of the Budget Control Act only 5 months ago. Today's vote is
simply an opportunity for Republicans to give themselves cover and to
flip-flop and say they're against what they in fact already voted for.
Make no mistake, Mr. Speaker: Nothing Republicans have proposed this
year would have forestalled an increase in the debt ceiling, not the
Ryan budget, not the Republican Study Committee budget, not even the
balanced budget amendment. Avoiding default was the difficult but
responsible action last August, and it remains the responsible action
today.
I urge my colleagues to leave their flip-flops at the beach and do
the responsible thing. Put country ahead of politics today.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Tom Graves.
Mr. GRAVES of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I'll try not to follow up too
much on the flip-flop comments, but I do prefer Crocs if anybody cares.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to President Obama's latest request
to raise the debt limit. Mr. Obama's spending spree in just 3 short
years accounts for almost one-third of our national debt, the most
rapid increase in the debt of any U.S. President and more debt than the
first 41 Presidents combined.
And the Nation's debt level has recently reached a disturbing
milestone. The U.S. debt is now as big as the entire U.S. economy.
That's the value of
[[Page H50]]
all goods and services produced here in the United States. It's another
stark warning that America cannot continue spending at the current
pace. And alarm bells should be going off all throughout the Halls of
Congress because this problem is not going away. Yet, here we are again
poised to go down and continue down this Road to Ruin.
The will to see the error of our ways and make significant spending
cuts still doesn't exist here in Washington. Unless we start making the
tough choices now, this Nation will reach a point where we have no
choice at all.
Mr. POLIS. Again, the Republicans doth protest too much. If there is
concern about the budget deficit, why did every Republican who has
spoken here today--every Republican except for four--vote to double our
national debt over the next 10 years? Why has every Republican here
voted for a budget that included $5.1 trillion in deficit spending,
more deficit spending than this country has ever had in a 10-year
period?
I certainly hear complaints about President Obama and others. The
President can't spend a penny--a penny--without congressional approval.
So if the Republicans are concerned about the budget, why did they go
on a Christmas spending spree where 147 Republicans voted to spend over
$900 billion, every penny of it deficit spending? This makes no sense,
Mr. Speaker.
Let's address this budget deficit, as President Obama has charged us
to do with the Bowles-Simpson Commission. Let's undertake a bipartisan
approach to solve the deficit. This Nation shouldn't have a $5.1
trillion deficit, as the Republicans have voted on and passed. This
body should not spend enough money to double the national debt by the
year 2021, which every Republican except for four has voted for.
Let's get to work, Mr. Speaker. This is all fun and games, but the
country is burning while we continue to work to solve this issue and
avoid the hard ones.
I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1310
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Randy Hultgren.
Mr. HULTGREN. Mr. Speaker, today I rise in support of this important
resolution of disapproval. I oppose raising the debt ceiling and will
continue to oppose raising the debt ceiling without a real structural
reform to how Washington works.
A balanced budget amendment is what we need. We find ourselves in
this position today because the President has come to Congress telling
us that he wants to raise the Nation's debt ceiling again. Our Nation's
credit card is maxed out because of his administration's reckless
spending.
My home State of Illinois is a perfect example of the truth that we
cannot spend, borrow, and tax ourselves out of huge budget deficits;
and now Illinois is the State in the worst financial shape of any other
State.
Today's vote will not just show which of our colleagues support more
spending, but it will also reflect our positions on the greater
philosophical divide confronting us: Are we for bigger government or
smaller, more accountable, more effective government?
Today's vote will clearly show the American people who in this
Chamber wants to further grow the size of government, let it intrude
further into the private sector, and give more power to Washington
bureaucrats to meddle in the everyday lives of American citizens; and
in contrast, it will show those of us who believe that a smaller
government increases our constituents' liberties.
By supporting this resolution of disapproval, we are sending a
message that we are standing for smaller government and greater
individual freedom. We must not increase our debt ceiling without real
structural change to how Washington works.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask my friend from South
Carolina if he has any remaining speakers.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Yes, sir. I suppose I have four or five.
Mr. POLIS. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Dan Burton.
Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
You know, this whole process amuses me because, when we passed the
Budget Control Act, we, in effect, gave the President the ability to
raise the debt ceiling by an additional $500 billion without us having
any control whatsoever. And with this $1.2 trillion we're talking about
raising the debt ceiling today, we really don't have any control over
that either.
Now, I voted against the Budget Control Act and I voted against
raising the debt ceiling, or giving the President the authority to
raise the debt ceiling by that first $500 billion, and I'm going to
vote against the $1.2 trillion increase today.
But here's how it works, and I don't think the American people
understand it. We disapprove today and let's say the Senate
disapproves, and it goes to the President and he vetoes it. It comes
back to us, and we have to have a two-thirds majority vote to override
it. So this is not going to happen. We have, in effect, given the
President of the United States the ability to raise the debt ceiling
without us having any control whatsoever, and that's just wrong.
We should never have passed that Budget Control Act the way we did.
This body should always have the ability to stop raising the debt
ceiling. But when we passed the Budget Control Act the way we did, we
gave the President carte blanche, and it's dead wrong.
This President now has control that no President has had in history.
He is making appointments without advice and consent of the United
States Senate. He is able to raise the debt ceiling without us being
able to do a darn thing about it. It's just wrong, and this body made a
big mistake when we put that provision in the Budget Control Act, and
the American people need to know it.
Mr. POLIS. You know, Mr. Speaker, sometimes it seems like we're
arguing about a different bill in this Chamber. Many of those who have
spoken on the other side have risen to attack government spending; and
yet they voted for a budget with a $5.1 trillion deficit over a 10-year
period, a bigger deficit than this Nation has ever had. Many of them
also voted to spend $915 billion December 17th on their Christmas
shopping spree, all deficit spending. And now they're complaining about
a deficit that their votes caused.
Let me assure you of something, Mr. Speaker. This Nation pays its
bills. Families across America pay their bills. When families spend too
much on Christmas gifts, the answer is not to not pay your credit card
bill in January. The answer is to cut back on spending. That's what
families across America know. That's what this Congress needs to know.
That's common sense.
Every Republican in this body, except for four, voted for a budget
that called for specifically raising the debt ceiling from $14.3
trillion to $23.1 trillion. The House Republican budget voted to double
the national debt over the next 10 years.
We can and we must do better, Mr. Speaker. Let's get past these games
and begin a real discussion about reining in the national deficit and
starting to pay down our national debt.
I reserve the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado has 12 minutes
remaining. The gentleman from South Carolina has 13 minutes remaining.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Mulvaney).
Mr. MULVANEY. I thank my colleague, and thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I want to follow on to what my colleague said in his opening remarks
about trying to get your hands around how big $1.2 trillion is. It's
one of the things I struggle with. I know it's one of the things that
my folks back home struggle with. So I look at it in a different
fashion.
If you are a family that is making $46,000 a year, which is just
under the average household in the United States, this is the
equivalent of borrowing an additional $14,000, which might not sound
that much until you stop to realize that if you were that little family
making $46,000 a year, trying to borrow an additional $14,000--which is
what we're doing today--you also owe $305,000 on the credit card bill.
You
[[Page H51]]
owe $305,000 on the credit card bill, and you are trying to borrow
another $14,000.
It raises the question in my mind, Mr. Speaker, a fairly
straightforward and honest question: Does the President really ever
intend to pay it back? Seriously. I think that is a legitimate question
to ask.
If someone came to me and said, ``Would you loan me an additional
$14,000?'' and I knew that you already owed $305,000, I think asking
that person a legitimate question would be to say, ``Do you ever really
intend to pay it back?'' And if the answer is, ``Yes,'' which I assume
it is, my question then would be, ``Well, when?'' Because you offered
us a budget last year, Mr. President, that never balances, ever.
We've heard a lot of nasty things today about Mr. Ryan's budget,
about the GOP budget. At least it balances eventually and goes to
surplus and provides for a method with which to pay off the debt. The
Republican Study Committee budget, which many of us voted for, balances
it in 8 years and allows us to pay off the debt. Yet the President has
never offered us a budget that ever balances or produces a surplus to
generate the money with which to repay the debt that he's asking us to
take on today.
The President's own words in 2006 have become somewhat famous. Back
then when he was in the Senate, he said that the fact that we are here
today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership
failure.
America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans
deserve better.
Mr. Speaker, I ask the simple question: If the President would like
to exercise some leadership, the opportunity exists for him to do so.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. I yield the gentleman from South
Carolina an additional 30 seconds.
Mr. MULVANEY. And that would be to simply send us a budget that
balances. In his lifetime would be great; in his children's lifetime
would be okay; but send us a budget, Mr. President, that balances at
some time. You are at the White House right now working on it to send
to us next month. Send us a budget that balances sometime so at least
maybe we can pretend that we will eventually pay off this money that he
wants us to borrow today.
Mr. POLIS. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I want to quote from an article in The Hill. My friend
and colleague Mr. Mulvaney from South Carolina said that this entire
procedure ``is just a fig leaf for some Republicans to say they are
against more debt, even though they essentially approved it.''
That's what we know this to be. This money has been spent. It's out
the door. My colleague, Mr. Mulvaney from South Carolina, agrees and
has put it into the Record. Even the budget from the Republican Study
Committee, which the gentleman cited, calls for specifically raising
the debt ceiling by $5.6 trillion, increasing the national debt by a
third. That's not the answer.
The President has led the way through the creation of the Simpson-
Bowles Commission and their hard, bipartisan work to come up with a way
to reduce the national deficit. The Republican Study Committee budget,
the Paul Ryan budget, all of the budgets that the Republicans brought
before the House increase the deficit substantially, more so than any
Congress has in the history of this entire country.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the
gentleman from South Carolina, Mr. Trey Gowdy.
{time} 1320
Mr. GOWDY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I want to thank my friend and
colleague from the great State of South Carolina, Mr. Tim Scott, for
his outstanding work on the Rules Committee.
So here we are again, Mr. Speaker, less than 6 months removed from
last summer's so-called debt crisis, on the verge of committing another
act of generational embezzlement. We are on the verge of assigning
another trillion dollars of debt to our progeny because we can't muster
the courage to make hard decisions.
We're on the verge of $16 trillion in debt, Mr. Speaker, because we
can't bring ourselves to say ``no.'' We're on the verge of $16 trillion
in debt, Mr. Speaker, because we refuse to have a serious conversation
about the role of government juxtaposed with the role of the
individual.
And at times like this, when leadership and moral courage, as my
friend from South Carolina, Mick Mulvaney, so eloquently put it, when
moral courage and leadership are needed we get slogans more befitting
of a student body president race than a campaign to be the leader of
the free world.
This administration says it wants a ``balanced approach'' but a
``balanced approach'' apparently doesn't include a balanced budget.
This administration says it wants a grand bargain, a big,
transformative deal, but the details of such a deal would fit nicely on
the back side of a postage stamp.
And my personal favorite, Mr. Speaker, this administration wants the
``rich to pay their fair share.'' I've heard that phrase several times
this morning. What I have not heard, Mr. Speaker, because they never
seem to get around to defining who the rich are, and they never seem to
get around to defining the word ``fair,'' which may be the most
subjective word in the English language.
So I would ask, is it fair, is 34 percent not enough? You want a
half? You want two-thirds?
When will your President define who the rich are and what's fair?
And if sloganeering and class warfare were not insidious enough, this
administration criticizes those who do have the moral courage to offer
a way out. Where is the President's entitlement reform plan? Where is
his tax reform plan? Where is his regulatory reform plan? Where is his
litigation reform plan?
Mr. Speaker, I have seen his reelection plan. Where is the plan to
pay down the debt, balance the budget, and offer real opportunity to
our fellow Americans who want it and need it?
We had a town hall in Greenville, South Carolina, Mr. Speaker, over
the Christmas break, and one of the people I work for gave me some good
advice. He said, drop the trillions and billions and talk where real
people can understand. And he was right.
So, Mr. Speaker, assume a family makes $22,000 a year, but the
family's expenses are $38,000 a year, and all the while they carry
$142,000 in credit card debt. Do you think they really need an increase
in their line of credit? Do you think another job or more hours will
make ends meet?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. I yield the gentleman another 30
seconds.
Mr. GOWDY. Mr. Speaker, you don't decide to go to the matinee instead
of the 9 p.m. movie and order a cheaper appetizer when you're $142,000
in debt. You make real, dramatic, systemic transformative change.
Each one of us received an inheritance, Mr. Speaker, from our parents
and grandparents. We received a better, stronger, more vibrant country
than the one they inherited, and we have squandered that inheritance.
We have become prodigal sons and daughters, except we have a credit
card.
I hope the generations that come after us will have the courage the
generations that came before us had, for we have been profiles in
timidity and greed.
Mr. POLIS. Well, the gentleman from South Carolina didn't give me a
chance to answer the question that he posed to me. He said, what's rich
and what's fair?
What I and many others have proposed is that people making over $1
million a year in income is who we're talking about, not people with a
net worth of 2 or 3 million or less, but people who have an income,
make $1 million or more a year in income, and the tax rate would go
from 35 to 39.6 percent, a 4\1/2\ percent increase. That's what we're
talking about as part of a comprehensive package. That's in the
bipartisan Bowles-Simpson package, that's in the bipartisan Gang of Six
package. That's some of the revenue that, along with cuts and
entitlement reform, are part of the solution to this issue.
Rather than bellyaching and complaining about having to do what
Republicans themselves have said they
[[Page H52]]
were going to do in the Ryan budget and the Republican Study Group
budget that's doubled the deficit--Republicans committed to doubling
the deficit. I didn't support that. I voted against those bills. But
Republicans promised to double the deficit. I opposed that. But here
they are, now that they're doing the spending that they did, their
massive spending spree in December, their budget that doubles the size
of the national deficit, and here they are bellyaching, after spending
all that money, that they don't want to pay the bill.
Well, that's immature, Mr. Speaker. Let's rein in the spending,
rather than not make good on the full faith and credit of the United
States of America.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Fleming).
Mr. FLEMING. I thank the gentleman, and I thank the Speaker.
The reason why we're here today is because of the Balanced Budget Act
of last year, which was a flawed bill, one which I voted against. Why?
It set spending limits way too high. It guts defense by $1 trillion in
a time when the world is becoming even more dangerous than ever. It cut
funding to Medicare providers in a time when patients out there need
access to their physicians and hospitals. And it finally creates a
sham, this resolution that we're debating today, which is just that, a
sham.
All the President has to do is veto our vote of disapproval and it
automatically goes into effect. We just basically handed the President,
in a time when we have crossed that threshold, $15 trillion of debt
more than our GDP, our gross domestic product, which puts us up there
with Greece. We have now handed the President a gift of another
spending of $1.2 trillion, which now brings him increasing the national
debt.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. I yield the gentleman another 20
seconds.
Mr. FLEMING. This brings the President from a point which all
Presidents, all the way through George Bush 43, bringing us to $10.6
trillion, increasing that national debt by 70 percent, just in one term
under President Obama.
I urge my colleagues to vote for the disapproval.
Mr. POLIS. Well, finally, Mr. Speaker, we have some bipartisan
agreement. My colleague from Louisiana called this vote a sham. My
colleague from South Carolina called this a fig leaf to disguise excess
Republican spending. I think we have agreement on those basic concepts.
Whether you call this a sham or a fig leaf, this bill, this process
that the Republicans have put before us doesn't do a thing to solve the
deficit, doesn't do a thing to rein in the national debt. It only
perpetuates this Congress' addiction to spending, Mr. Speaker.
By somehow pretending to say that we're doing something by making a
fuss over whether we're going to make good on the full faith and credit
of what we've already spent, rather than just not spend it in the first
place, Mr. Speaker, we're misleading the American public into thinking
that this Congress is tackling the national debt and the deficit, when
all we're doing, as my friend from Louisiana said, is simply a sham.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Mr. Speaker, we're prepared to close.
Mr. POLIS. I am prepared to close as well. I ask the Speaker how much
time remains.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Colorado has 8\1/2\
minutes. The gentleman from South Carolina has 5\1/2\ minutes.
Mr. POLIS. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, Americans are urging both parties, Republicans and
Democrats, to work together to solve the basic challenges that this
country faces, joblessness, a tax code that rewards those with well-
connected lobbyists rather than hardworking Americans, and yes, to
solve the budget deficit and budget crisis and ensure that we don't
leave a legacy of debt for our children.
And yet, we will deal with none of these issues today, none of these
issues in the 2 days the Republican majority has scheduled us to work
this week, amidst the biggest national recession since the Great
Depression. And each time that President Obama and Democrats have
sought consensus on these issues, the majority have bowed to radical
elements within their party that insist on an agenda that is far
outside the American mainstream and will lead to doubling the national
debt over the next 10 years.
Time and time again, we've seen the Republicans choose gridlock over
problem solving. We saw this most recently when the House Republicans
refused to allow a vote on the bipartisan compromise to extend the
payroll tax break.
You know, the American people are tired of political games. They want
action rather than rhetoric; they want progress rather than
partisanship. And with today's move, the Republicans are again playing
the dangerous game of signaling to the world that America might not pay
its debt, might not make good on the very money that the Republicans
voted to spend in December.
{time} 1330
At a time when Standard & Poor's has moved to downgrade nine European
countries' ratings, the last thing our Nation can afford is a risk of
default. If we are further downgraded, Mr. Speaker, it would likely
lead to an increase in the rate that we have to pay to finance our
national debt. This would, in fact, increase the national debt even
more than the Republicans want to increase the national debt--by $5.1
trillion.
Yes, that very same Paul Ryan budget that ends Medicare as we know it
and has $5.1 trillion of deficit spending could have $10 trillion or
$20 trillion of deficit spending if the Republicans succeed in
jeopardizing our credit rating by playing games with the full faith and
credit of the United States of America.
Like millions of responsible Americans, our Nation knows that we must
make good on our obligations. Every minute that we waste debating
this--I'll use what the other side has called it--debating this sham,
the gentleman from Louisiana, this fig leaf, the gentleman from South
Carolina, every minute we waste debating this underlying rule and bill
is a minute that could have been spent enacting practical, substantial
legislation to end the budget deficit, to right the fiscal course of
this Nation, and put our country back on the road to economic recovery.
I strongly urge a ``no'' vote on the rule and the underlying bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of South Carolina. Hypocrisy is nothing new in the House of
Congress, unfortunately, and even in this House.
My good friend from Colorado talks about what we're doing on the
right-hand side. There's no question, however, that Mr. Polis himself
voted for the Democratic Caucus budget proposed by Mr. Van Hollen,
which would have increased spending by $4.5 trillion more than the Ryan
budget.
There is only one way to reduce the debt at that level of spending,
and that's higher and higher taxes on the middle class. It's bad enough
that, in one bill under the Democratic-controlled House, they increased
taxes on the middle class by $500 billion and at the same time raided
Social Security, men and women on a fixed income, by $500 billion--or a
half a trillion dollars.
It's unfortunate that not only were they increasing taxes, but they
specifically targeted the middle class, creating a new 3.8 percent
surtax on investment income on folks who have a middle class income.
It is very unfortunate that the President went a step further than
even the Democratic Caucus budget. He increased spending by $6.2
trillion more than the Ryan budget.
So everything we hear on the left right now about the spending and
the debt, we need to frame it in the real conversation around what the
left has already done under the Pelosi House $1.4 trillion annual
deficit.
In addition to that, we need to think to ourselves and ask the
question, do we need $49 trillion of spending over the next 10 years
that's been proposed by some on the left? Can we afford taking our
national debt from $16.3 trillion, $16.4 trillion with this credit card
extension into the $27 billion range at
[[Page H53]]
the end of this decade? The answer is obviously ``no.'' But the
hypocrisy is just business as usual from the left.
Mr. Speaker, today's vote is very clear. You either stand for
reducing spending here in Washington or you don't. It is as simple as
that.
I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question
on the resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on ordering the previous
question.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question will be
followed by 5-minute votes on adoption of H. Res. 515, if ordered; and
approval of the Journal, if ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 238,
nays 176, answered ``present'' 1, not voting 18, as follows:
[Roll No. 2]
YEAS--238
Adams
Aderholt
Akin
Alexander
Amash
Amodei
Austria
Bachmann
Bachus
Barletta
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bass (NH)
Benishek
Berg
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brooks
Broun (GA)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Buerkle
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Canseco
Cantor
Capito
Carter
Cassidy
Chabot
Chaffetz
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cole
Conaway
Cravaack
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Davis (KY)
Denham
Dent
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Dreier
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers
Emerson
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Flake
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Gallegly
Gardner
Garrett
Gerlach
Gibbs
Gibson
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (MO)
Griffin (AR)
Griffith (VA)
Guinta
Guthrie
Hall
Hanna
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Hastings (WA)
Hayworth
Heck
Hensarling
Herger
Herrera Beutler
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurt
Issa
Jenkins
Johnson (IL)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Kelly
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kinzinger (IL)
Kissell
Kline
Labrador
Lamborn
Lance
Lankford
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lewis (CA)
LoBiondo
Long
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Mack
Manzullo
Marchant
Matheson
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCotter
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
Meehan
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller, Gary
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Myrick
Neugebauer
Nugent
Nunes
Nunnelee
Palazzo
Paul
Paulsen
Pearce
Pence
Petri
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price (GA)
Quayle
Reed
Rehberg
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rigell
Rivera
Roby
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross (FL)
Royce
Runyan
Ryan (WI)
Scalise
Schilling
Schmidt
Schock
Schweikert
Scott (SC)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Southerland
Stearns
Stivers
Stutzman
Sullivan
Terry
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Turner (NY)
Turner (OH)
Upton
Walberg
Walden
Walsh (IL)
Webster
West
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (FL)
Young (IN)
NAYS--176
Ackerman
Altmire
Andrews
Baca
Baldwin
Barrow
Bass (CA)
Becerra
Berman
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blumenauer
Boren
Boswell
Brady (PA)
Braley (IA)
Brown (FL)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Carney
Carson (IN)
Castor (FL)
Chandler
Chu
Cicilline
Clarke (MI)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Critz
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
DeFazio
DeGette
DeLauro
Deutch
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Fattah
Frank (MA)
Fudge
Garamendi
Gonzalez
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanabusa
Hastings (FL)
Higgins
Himes
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hochul
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Israel
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kildee
Kind
Kucinich
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee (CA)
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lujan
Lynch
Maloney
Markey
Matsui
McCarthy (NY)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Michaud
Miller (NC)
Miller, George
Moore
Moran
Murphy (CT)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree (ME)
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rahall
Rangel
Richardson
Richmond
Ross (AR)
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell
Sherman
Shuler
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stark
Sutton
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz (MN)
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watt
Waxman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Woolsey
Yarmuth
ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--1
Landry
NOT VOTING--18
Berkley
Campbell
Cardoza
Carnahan
Farr
Filner
Giffords
Grimm
Heinrich
Hinchey
Inslee
Marino
Noem
Olson
Payne
Pelosi
Reyes
Speier
{time} 1359
Ms. EDWARDS changed her vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
Messrs. MANZULLO and PALAZZO changed their vote from ``nay'' to
``yea.''
So the previous question was ordered.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
Stated against:
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall 2, I was away from the Capitol
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I
would have voted ``nay.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________