Congressional Record, Volume 158 Issue 121 (Tuesday, September 11, 2012)

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 121 (Tuesday, September 11, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H5852-H5858]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

UNFINISHED BUSINESS IN THE 112TH CONGRESS

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 5, 2011, the gentleman from New York (Mr. Tonko) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
Mr. TONKO. This evening we'll spend some time here in Special Order
on the House floor to address a great bit of unfinished business that
rests before the House. And we have just returned from what is a 5-week
recess where Members of this House were back in their districts and
addressing the events of this session. It has been labeled by many as a
do-nothing Congress. This evening we're going to talk about that do-
nothing agenda.
We have attempted in every which way to encourage the Congress, the
House, to address legislation that speaks to job creation and economic
recovery, continuing to build upon the achievements of the 111th
Congress, and we're now serving in the 112th.

{time} 2000

But for me, it's my second term in the House. The very first term for
me, the 111th Congress, was deemed by several polls out there to be one
of the most productive in decades where there were many things taken up
by this House that responded to the needs of America, middle class
Americans, Americans of all stripes, who required initiatives from this
House.
We were in the midst of a very dark period, a recession that gripped
this economy that put 8.2 million people at risk by their losing a job
through no fault of their own. We were losing as many as 800,000 jobs a
month.
So the devastation of that impact on the American economy, bringing
America's economy to its knees, needed a response from government.
The President acknowledged an agenda that would move us not only into
a response against the recession but putting us at the cutting edge of
a modern economy. Investing in research, investing in science and
technology, investing in an ideas economy, investing in an innovation
economy--that's the sort of priming of the pump, if you will. That's
essential for us to respond in substantive terms for us to utilize
government as a tool that is productive and enabling and empowering the
middle class, empowering our small business community, empowering our
entrepreneurs.
That was the hope-for. And it happened in the 111th Congress.
But something drastically happened with the change in leadership in
the 112th Congress. We now have been ranked in single-digit percentage
approval. Below 10 percent is the approval rating for this Congress,
some of the lowest points achieved, or earned, by this Congress in its
history as a House.
That is a very telling statement. How do we go from the most
productive in decades to most unfavorable in the history of the House?
We have a reactionary response from those who want to destroy the
essence of government. They do not weave any sort of government program
activity into the fabric of response to a very difficult period in our
economic history. It is one that is unpopular and unproductive. It is
one that is being rejected by people out there.
When I go back to my district, I hear it from Republicans, Democrats,
Independents alike: Why can't something get done? There's a paralysis
here. And it's because there's a rejection. There is a sense of
partisanship rather than partnership. There is an outright attempt to
deny anything coming to the House as a request to get productive and
progressive policy done.
So there are things that languish. There is this crush of big tasks
that rest before the House, work to produce a jobs bill, work to
produce a response to the ag crisis, the reauthorization of our ag
bill, work to invest in the middle class.
It's been this House, when controlled by the Democrats, that spoke to
the opportunities, the ladders of success, if you will. The Democratic
conference in this House was all about, has always been about, in my
tenure here, about producing ladders of success. You know, we believe
in that American principle that you work hard, act with responsibility,
play by the rules, and expect to taste success.
Well, we haven't seen that sort of cooperative spirit from the new
Republican majority in the House.
You know, we believe, as Democrats, that you produce those ladders of
opportunity. You allow people to climb toward their American Dream. We
enable people to utilize their gifts, their talents, their passions,
their skills to empower themselves, their families, the small
businesses. And so we stand for this wonderful three-legged stool that
speaks to the empowerment of small business, forever the pulse of
American enterprise, that looks to create jobs that are then tethered
very strongly with small business citizenship into the local community
grain.
Then we talk about investing in entrepreneurs, those dreamers, the
movers, the shakers, the builders of society that have forever been the
American spirit, the pioneer spirit.
I represent a district in upstate New York that is the donor area to
the Erie Canal. And that canal produced not only a port out of a little
town called New York City but gave birth to a necklace of communities
that became the epicenters of invention and innovation.
The empowerment of the entrepreneur--another strong underlying
principle of the agenda of Democrats in the House.
Finally, a thriving middle class--making certain that we utilize the
policies that can be created in this House that will empower with tax
fairness, empower with investment in the worker, in education, higher
education, apprenticeship programs to empower the middle class and
small businesses.
We have measures that we have asked to be brought to the floor. There
is a denial of any sort of single jobs bill before the House. We have
requested over and over again to invest in that agenda the empowerment
of America through small business, entrepreneurs, a thriving middle
class. It's been rejected.

Tonight I'm joined by a colleague from the State of Connecticut,
Joseph Courtney. Joe Courtney is a strong believer in this government
process. He's a strong believer that when we can prime the pump and
when we can utilize government to make a difference, when we can create
programs that speak to the honest-to-goodness agenda for all strata of
America, but utilizing that middle class strata--small business,
farming as a small business--making certain we utilize every strength,
every sector of our economy and not just relying on a service sector,
especially the financial services that we did that brought us into a
crisis situation--we can incorporate all of the sectors of the economy.
One of those prime sectors? Agriculture.
Representative Courtney, it is great to have you joining us this
evening in this colloquy.
The agriculture industry from coast to coast is a heavy-duty
important industry. You sit on the Ag Committee. As a representative
from Connecticut,

[[Page H5853]]

you know the importance of agriculture to your State. I know the
importance of agriculture in upstate New York, throughout New York.
Reauthorization of an ag bill is fundamental, is it not, to go
forward and create opportunities?
Mr. COURTNEY. It is. Thank you for, again, taking the time tonight to
speak on the floor of the House.
This is a place where the eyes not only of the country but the world
are on us right now in terms of whether or not this body is going to
have the strength of will to act and deal with, again, all of the
ticking clocks which you've mentioned earlier: the fiscal cliff at the
end of this year; sequestration; and at the end of this month, a farm
bill reauthorization.
Again, for those watching tonight, I think it's important to have a
little context here, which is that up until this year, every 5 years
since the end of World War II, Congress has acted to enact a farm bill
which is a 5-year policy bill that sets up all of the ground rules for
a vast array of issues that surround producers in this country, the
folks who get up every morning and milk the cows and plant the crops
and harvest the crops.
It deals with issues of rural development. Small-town America depends
on USDA rural development funds and programs to build everything from
sewers, hospitals, health clinics. Again, all of the infrastructure,
which again, small towns by themselves really don't have the financial
means to create.
Conservation programs, forestry, food policy, nutrition policy.
Again, the farm bill is a profoundly important measure that sets up
both producer and production policies and agriculture but also consumer
ends in terms of food safety, food security, et cetera.
Incredibly, we are at a point right now where at the end of this
month, at the end of September, the last farm bill will expire. If
Congress does not act, then farm policy will revert to what the state
of the law was in this country in 1949. Again, that statutory construct
is so completely disconnected from the reality of what farms and
agriculture is today in the 21st century that it defies, really, the
powers of any Secretary of Agriculture to implement.
But, again, as you point out, when you look at the U.S. economy
today, agriculture is leading the way in terms of growth, in terms of
exports, in terms of renewed activity even in New England, which is not
viewed as sort of a big farm State. But the fact is that specialty
crops, which I'm sure in upper State New York we're seeing again
growing farmers markets, are really the renaissance and movement
towards making sure that foods that we serve our kids in cafeterias are
on the dinner tables in American homes.

{time} 2010

Again, people have just a heightened interest in terms of making sure
it's local and fresh, and the farm bill sets up the policies that make
that movement continue to grow.
Well, where are we tonight? The Senate passed a farm bill. They
passed a farm bill back in June. It was a bipartisan measure, hard-
fought. It took 3 weeks to make its way to the Senate floor, getting
through all the procedural hurdles. Yet Republicans and Democrats in
the Senate came together with a farm bill which does great things in
terms of reforming agriculture policy in this country. It eliminates
direct payments to farmers, which saves the taxpayers $23 billion over
the next 5 years. So it actually helps the deficit in this country by
passing the Senate farm bill. It reforms dairy price supports, which is
critically important right now because, again, the structure that is in
place today really was shown to not be adequate in 2009 when milk
prices crashed during the recession. It sets up a new risk insurance
program, which will allow dairy farmers to actually have some
confidence and security about their future.
It does, again, a great job in terms of protecting and maintaining
the network of food supply for Americans who are struggling to put food
on the table. It's a good, solid, bipartisan measure that really
addresses all of the challenges of the 21st century.
In the House, we actually reported out a farm bill out of the House
Agriculture Committee with a strong, bipartisan vote. It has problems.
Frankly, it cuts too deeply into nutrition. But this is an issue which,
again, people who are close to it are very confident can be worked out
in a conference committee if the House floor will take up a farm bill.
And the Speaker, to this moment, has refused to even signal that he
will schedule a vote for a farm bill to move the process along.
So, literally, as the clock ticks towards the end of September,
farmers and producers all across America are, in horror, looking at
this Chamber, looking at this Speaker, and saying: Are you kidding me?
You won't even schedule a vote so that we can work through a bill on
the floor and send it to conference committee so that we can actually
get real movement and get a farm bill passed?
A couple of hours ago I was with the National Farmers Union just down
the block here, where, again, we've got farmers from California to
Maine who are gathering here in Washington, D.C., the American Farm
Bureau, specific commodity crop producers who are flooding the Halls of
Congress saying we need a farm bill.
This should not be a partisan issue that should gridlock, again, one
of the most vibrant and critical components of America's economy. And
yet to this moment we have still gotten no signal from Speaker Boehner
and the Republican leadership that they will even schedule a vote. It's
incredible. I mean, the Agriculture Committee in the House produced a
bipartisan bill. They did their work. Chairman Lucas, Ranking Member
Peterson--I was there for the 13-plus-hour markup to get that bill
through the floor--they did a great job in terms of navigating and
getting a bill to the floor. This was done before the August recess.
The Speaker refused to bring it up before we went home for 5 weeks.
Five weeks have passed. Farmers all across America are demanding
action. We're back in town, and yet nothing has been scheduled in this
Chamber to bring up a farm bill that we can send to the conference
committee and get some real action and results. Totally unacceptable.
Let me just finish before I throw the baton back to you. At the end
of August, dairy price supports expired. Again, the last farm bill had
a measure, it was called a Feed Adjuster Index, which would basically
allow farmers who were facing high feed costs to get help and relief.
Anybody who looks in the financial pages can see that corn prices are
hitting record highs because of the drought out in the Midwest; feed
costs have gone through the roof; fuel costs are going through the
roof. All the input costs for running a dairy farm are at record highs,
and yet, as of a couple of weeks ago or a week and a half ago, the
dairy farmers of America had basically the rug pulled out from under
them because this Chamber did not move and do its job back in July and
get a farm bill passed out of this Chamber and sent to conference
committee.
So they were sort of the first wave of victims of Republican inaction
in this House to move a farm bill. At the end of this month, it will be
the rest of American agriculture that will have the rug pulled out from
under it and revert back a statutory structure to 1949, which is the
state of the law, if we don't move forward and get a farm bill done.
So I'm glad you scheduled this session tonight, Congressman Tonko,
because I think the American people need to hear that Democrats stand
ready to roll up their sleeves, get to work on this floor, pass a farm
bill, send it to the conference committee, work with the bipartisan
majority in the Senate to pass a farm bill, and help the American
farmers and producers who every single day are making sure that the
system of food production and supply works. It is a very fragile
system, as we're seeing with the drought out in Iowa, and people in
this Chamber are treating it with just, in my opinion, outrageous
neglect by not really doing their constitutional duty, showing some
leadership, and bringing a farm bill up for a vote in this Chamber.

Mr. TONKO. Representative Courtney, you're a great friend. You're a
great friend not only to me, but to this House, to the district you
represent, and to the State of Connecticut. And you're such a good
friend because of the academics that you put into the

[[Page H5854]]

job. I have watched you in action, and I know that you are about
building consensus.
But what we have here, you talk about, doesn't this become even more
urgent an item with the drought situation that we've had across this
country? Grain prices are going to rise. So to have some stability and
security--predictability--into the ag outcomes for many sectors of
agriculture, it becomes even more critical. And to go back, to revert
to a 1949 formula, is sinful. It's immoral.
People talk about the lack of sensitivity, the lack of productivity,
but we're talking about immoral outcomes here that don't enable people
to do their work. I mean, this is a small business--in many places
large business--but agriculture runs that gamut. For many, it's small
business, it's family business, it's a way of life, and we're denying
that very fabric of this country.
I know groups have come together in atypical fashion--outside groups
that are putting pressure here--they have come in partnership to say:
Hey, look, get this done, as you're suggesting, get it done. You've
done some of the basics. Why are you ignoring this number one industry
for many States?
Mr. COURTNEY. And just to follow up on that point, again, the Senate
farm bill included within it disaster relief assistance--not just for a
short period of time, but for 5 years. Again, the House did bring up a
so-called ``disaster relief'' bill right before the August break--
something which the American Farm Bureau dismissed as inadequate in
terms of actual agricultural policy in this country--used as a pay-for
taking money out of conservation, which, again, as critical a priority
as almost anything else in the farm bill. Again, it was just an almost
pathetic attempt to provide political cover for people who knew that,
again, with the catastrophe happening out in the Midwest, they couldn't
possibly leave town without at least trying to make some small gesture
towards acknowledging that that was actually happening.
But, again, the Senate measure includes a full disaster relief. The
House committee bill which came out has full disaster relief. That's
what, really, the American agriculture community is looking for.
Tomorrow, on the steps of the Capitol, there will be a huge rally
with farm groups from all across America gathering on the steps.
Senator Stabenow and Congressman Collin Peterson from Minnesota are
going to be out there leading the charge. We understand that some
Republican Members are going to show some courage and get out there on
those steps and join those farmers in saying we need a farm bill now to
be voted on in the House of Representatives. And it's time for the
Republican leadership to listen to the people who, again, are out there
busting their tail every single day making sure that there's food on
the table for this country.
Mr. TONKO. You know, I listen to you, and your State was tremendously
impacted by Irene and Lee last summer. My State was tremendously
impacted. We reached for those very pots--that we've emptied with the
Republican solution--that served our communities so very well with
disaster funds. We can't tamper with some of those legitimate set-
asides because they're there, they're required by acts of Mother Nature
or by manmade situations where we need to have disaster dollars
available.
But you can't help but quantify. I mean, you just imagine the
extrapolating out of jobs, the impact of jobs if you don't get this
done, the ripple effect into those ancillary businesses that feed into
the needs of agriculture. It is a tremendous opportunity for us to grow
stability in the economy. And to not do this, this do-nothing
Republican Congress is devastating the economy. We could have made
major strides, we could have gone forward with a lot of attempts to do
good.
Now, what I sense here, from what you've talked about with these
poison pills that have been adopted or placed into their solutions, or
the ignoring of agreed-upon legislation in committee, this is a
recurring theme. I mean, we saw the FAA, the Federal Aeronautics
Administration, impacted again by delays, games that were being played
because they need the full loaf or they want it their way. There is no
sense of consensus that is driving these outcomes. And so we delayed
for months the FAA outcome, which challenged, put at risk hundreds of
projects, tens of thousands of construction jobs that were going to
speak to safety at our airports.
We saw it with student loans. You were so actively involved with
that. You were outspoken in your criticism of perhaps doubling our
students' interest on their loans. And they, again, inserted poison
pills. We waited until the midnight hour to get something done--with a
lot of unpredictability again.

{time} 2020

We saw it with the payroll tax relief that we were trying to do for
middle-income America and small businesses. Couldn't get it done.
Waited till the last minute. Poison pills that delayed progress.
This is a recurring theme, is it not?
Mr. COURTNEY. It is of course. And again, another example of a
measure that really is just teed up and ready for action in the House
is the postal reform. We have a postal system right now which is both
technically and substantively in bankruptcy. The obligations of the
postal system in terms of its expenses and pension costs now exceed the
revenue that's coming in.
And once again we have a situation where the Senate has already
acted. They passed a bipartisan postal reform bill. My colleague from
Connecticut, Joe Lieberman, Senator Joe Lieberman is the chair of the
committee that put together, again, a significant bipartisan coalition
to get a postal reform bill through which would provide stability in
the finances of this system, which, again, is in bankruptcy.
Nothing has happened on this side of the campus, of the Capitol in
terms of any action in terms of bringing a bill to the floor to make
sure that, again, the postal system, which goes back to the birth of
our country, is not going to capsize into hopeless bankruptcy. I mean,
just totally inexcusable to have an issue like this, which, I challenge
anyone to point to any time in American history where the postal
service has become sort of a partisan political football. Yet this
Republican leadership has done nothing to bring a postal reform bill to
the floor.
Violence Against Women Act, again, a measure which is really a law
enforcement measure in terms of giving our police and court systems and
victim advocates the tools they need to eliminate the scourge of
domestic violence in this country. My wife is involved, actually, in
multidisciplinary teams back in Hartford, Connecticut, in terms of
dealing with this issue as a pediatric nurse practitioner.
Again, the Senate passed a good, strong bipartisan bill. We had a
partisan measure that just turned the clock back in terms of protecting
victims who, again, are here on temporary visas, again, as some kind of
statement, I guess, about immigration. And yet this is a measure which
has not been sent to conference by this side of the Chamber, and we
have a situation, a priority such as domestic violence which has
traditionally been completely nonpartisan since it was first enacted
back in the 1990s, and no action is being taken by this Republican
leadership who seems intent on going home pretty soon and just
basically leaving town until election time.
I mean, it's just stunning that, you know, farm bill, postal reform
bill, violence against women, we should be able to do these things
tonight and give this country some confidence.
Mr. TONKO. Representative Courtney, you talk about the reducing of
VAWA, the Violence Against Women Act. If the spirit and letter of that
law has been to protect women, why would you weaken certain
protections?
There's this order of meanness and selectiveness and insensitivity
that has abounded in this House, where they reduce efforts that have
been championed over the decades, hard-fought efforts, bipartisan
efforts, bicameral efforts, the executive branch working with the
legislative branch, making certain that the heart and soul of this
reform through the ages has been about making America stronger.
You know, it's we, the people, working toward a more perfect Union, a
more perfect Union. We've made such wonderful progress. We have
acknowledged the needs of women, where they were ignored in legislative
or statutory concepts. We go forward. And now it's

[[Page H5855]]

like, as you suggest, rolling the clock back, being insensitive to so
many needs out there and reducing the fabric of our government. It's
like trying to speak to an archaic sort of quality that's driven by
extreme thinking. It's the tail wagging the dog in the conference where
this extreme thinking has taken over the majority and this do-nothing
Republican Congress is not responding, not stepping up to the plate at
a time that it's very, very critical.
We saw this economy challenged more greatly than perhaps the
Depression of the past that really was a prime test, but in many of the
lives of today's working Americans, this is the first-time greatest
experience, a challenge before us. And when we should step up and be
the champions, the fairness and justice and resolve to move forward
with progressive policy, we're getting almost the reverse. It's the
antithesis of what's required here.
Mr. COURTNEY. And I would just say that the inaction of this
leadership--today we received an ominous warning from Moody's Investor
Services which warned that basically that Congress's failure to strike
a deal on the fiscal cliff some time within the next 6 months or so
will lead to a downgrade of this country's financial rating. Again,
Moody's preserved the Triple A status last August when we had the last
self-induced crisis by the Republican majority on the default issue.
And so the warning is out there. Incredibly, the Speaker, when he was
asked about this later in the day today, basically said he has no
confidence that we can strike a deal to avoid the fiscal cliff.
I mean, again, we're talking--it is September 11, a day when we
should be coming together and reflecting on our unity as American
people. And to have that kind of negativity at a time when we've been,
the same day we were warned that the country could capsize into a
downgrade, and just basically throw up his arms and say, well, he has
no confidence we can put that deal together, I'm reminded of the old
military saying, which is, you know, lead, follow, or get out of the
way.
And really, for a Speaker to basically say, at this early stage, that
he has no confidence that this body, which has gone through world wars,
depressions, a civil war, and has always been able to really show that
the genius of the Founding Fathers to create a structure where
decisions can be made is somehow incapable of dealing with the issue
that we're confronted with today is just a, really, just shocking
admission of abdication of leadership. And really, it just--it signals
that, you know, we need to have a change here in this Chamber, one way
or another if we're going to deal with the problems that are looming on
the horizon, which was your opening comments.

Mr. TONKO. And I agree with you. I think that the brinkmanship that
was utilized in the debate and the development of a response to the
debt ceiling crisis was an attachment of bells and whistles and all
sorts of extraneous materials that were being applied in an
inappropriate way. We needed to move forward and address an order of
crisis. America knows that, they understand they play by the rules and
you pay your bills.
But it was this attempt to weaken a process, and it was an attempt to
stall and delay and make a political statement at the expense of having
our then credit rating downgraded by S&P. So the outcome here was a
devastating one.
And, you know, it is really unfortunate that we're not heeding the
need out there. I believe the American public has been stating
emphatically they want solutions. They want us to come up with a
response to an economic crisis. They want to know how we're going to
move forward with this idea economy, innovation economy, clean energy
economy. They want to see us move toward energy independence. They want
to see us addressing transformation of the economy. They want advanced
manufacturing that requires training of workers that begins with
education investments, all of these things. They want us to develop
solutions.
They don't want paralysis. They don't want this divide, this great
divide. They don't want the partisanship.
They want partnership. They want solutions.
We saw what happened when you can advance solutions in this House.
You and I enjoyed the 111th Congress and the productivity of that
Congress. And to have moved to this sort of paralysis is unacceptable.
And the do-nothing Republican Congress is being watched very
carefully here, and I believe that this coming election will be a very
telling statement about rejecting the sort of delay, the rejecting of
the games being played, a rejecting of the disinvestment, a rejecting
of the defunding and the dismissiveness of a role that government could
and should play in very important areas.
You ask these other economies out there with which our American
business is competing. We're in an international race on innovation.
You know, much like the race, global race on space in the sixties, when
this country came together in resolve after a Sputnik moment, when they
dusted off their backside and said, Never again, and we're going to
move forward and we're going to be the Nation to stake that flag on the
Moon.
We won because we resolved to do it. We did it with great passion. We
did it with intellect. We did it coming together as a people of all
sorts of political stripes, and we worked together as one Nation.

{time} 2030

You're right, on this given day of 9/11, when we reflect upon those
tragedies and when our virtues as a Nation--our liberties, our
freedoms, our opportunities--were challenged and threatened and numbed
us for a moment, we came back with great resolve. Let's show the
passion here that we did in the sixties to win that global race in
space. Let's invest. Let's go forward. Let's make certain we don't tie
the hands of America behind her back. Let's move forward and invest in
an economy, in a race that is important to our efforts to maintain our
leadership on the international scale.
Mr. COURTNEY. I think, as Moody's indicated, with the fiscal cliff at
the end of this year and with the sequestration on January 1, there
really is only one place where this can get resolved, and it's right
here in this room. There are ideas that are on the table which, I
think, clearly show a middle ground--in fact, more than a middle
ground--as a way of solving these problems.
The President has put on the table an extension of the Bush tax cuts
for 98 percent of Americans that would entirely protect their present
tax status with no increase in taxes. Obviously, the cliff will cause
middle class families all across America to pay more if there is no
action in this Chamber. In fact, it provides for 100 percent of all
Americans the extension of the Bush tax cuts on incomes up to $250,000.
Any income above that would revert back to the Clinton era rates. That
change would provide about $1 trillion of deficit reduction for our
country at a time when the structural deficit that the Bush tax cuts
created is obviously scaring investor services like Moody's.
This is a proposal which is not a 50/50 deal. It's a 98 percent deal
in terms of protecting those existing tax cuts, and it's a 100 percent
deal in terms of protecting people's taxes up to $250,000.
Mr. TONKO. A point oftentimes lost. Even millionaires and
billionaires would get their tax breaks on a first order of income,
$250,000.
Do you know what stands in the way? If we have to be totally frank
here, they want to make certain that millionaires and billionaires
continue to get their bonanza of a tax break. Well, do you know what?
We know what got us into the economic crisis. We had a tax cut for
millionaires and billionaires primarily that was never paid for. We
fought two wars off line, off budget. So one of the first orders of
business that the President wanted to address was putting together an
honest budget. You didn't have the mechanism, the payment mechanism,
for the millionaire-billionaire tax cut, and you have to bring that
cost of the war into the budget.
We need to move forward with a sound and reasonable approach to
economic relief. The middle class has taken it on the chin, and it's
their turn. They need to be relieved, and we need to invest in those
orders of comeback that will empower our middle class. What I think is,
with the efforts

[[Page H5856]]

that have been made here in the House, the requests made in the House
are very legit: Do what you can afford. Keep the economy going. To me,
it's about aggregate demand for goods and services. So, if you relieve
the middle class, if you strengthen their purchasing power, if we had
that thriving middle class, someone needs to buy your product; someone
needs to make your product. If you empower that middle class, it's a
formula for success.
As you point out, Representative Courtney, it is 98 percent of the
general public that will enjoy that empowerment and 97 percent of the
small business community. There is a way to go forward with a
reasonable approach that really speaks to that strata that needs the
most assistance today.
Mr. COURTNEY. Six nights ago, we saw someone get on the floor of the
convention in Charlotte, North Carolina, and very methodically and with
great clarity explain exactly the points that we're talking about here
tonight.
President Bill Clinton, someone who today enjoys a 69 percent
approval rating, got on the floor of that convention. While he was
President, the public finances of this country came into balance for
the first time in over a generation, and 22 million new jobs were
created under his watch. If anyone has credibility in terms of a
perspective on economic and fiscal policy in this country, it's
President Bill Clinton.
What we have talked about here tonight is about reverting to the
Clinton era rates on incomes above $250,000. We know as a Nation that
that does not smother and punish success. It will not smother and
punish our economy. Those rates were in place when 22 million jobs were
created in the U.S. economy in the 1990s.
Today, what's interesting is that Mr. Romney, the Republican
Presidential candidate, is very careful not to criticize President
Clinton. In fact, he tries indirectly sometimes to even embrace him.
Well, he ought to embrace his positions on fiscal policy because, if he
did, we could pass a bill on this floor in no time flat, solve the
fiscal cliff, defuse sequestration, and get this country back on track
with more than just policies: with a new infusion of confidence, both
within our country and, frankly, in financial markets around the world,
that this place is capable of actually making some decisions and that
this place is actually capable of action.
The former President's comments in Charlotte obviously got a rock
star reception all across the country because that's what people are
hungry for--reasonable solutions coming from people who have
demonstrated that they actually can administer and be good stewards of
the U.S. economy. I think that, for the Republican leadership of this
Chamber to ignore that type of compromise and reasonable approach to
solving the fiscal problems we face today is politically very
dangerous.
Again, if you really look closely at the Romney campaign, they are
loath to even say anything negative about Bill Clinton or his time in
the White House. Do you know what? They're very careful also to avoid
talking about his policies, which basically President Obama and the
minority here, even with some significant modifications to accommodate
the other side, are prepared to move forward on. Let's really, I think,
heed the advice that he gave this country six nights ago and move
forward with these policies.

Mr. TONKO. Representative Courtney, you talk about that event. When
he made his presentation, he did that long-term review and a rather
shorter focus over the last couple of years--the first term of
President Obama's. Yet, when he talked about the track record over the
last decade, he talked about 28 years of Republican leadership versus
24 years of Democratic leadership. He talked about the outcome in jobs,
and said, under the Republican watch, 22 million jobs, I believe, were
created. Under the Democratic watch, there were 42. So, he said, let's
look at the record. Let's check the scorecard. Then he did the short-
term outcome of President Obama's administration. He was talking about
the numbers of jobs created and gave a zero to what the Republicans
were advancing in the House.
It's pretty obvious that there is this outcome of success. People
constantly refer to the Clinton years now. What happened there? Well,
we undid the surplus that was created. We spent down on a tax cut that
wasn't paid for. We fought two wars that weren't on line with the
budget. It's obvious we know what happened. Why would we give the keys
back to someone who drove us into the ditch?
So this whole effort in this administration with 30 now consecutive
months of private sector job growth and the President's asking for
Congress to move forward with an agenda that has had obvious positive
results and its being denied and held up, played with, entered in with
poison pills is not what the American public wants. They want those
solutions, and they are denying those solutions. I think the do-nothing
Republican Congress has caused great pain and has denied progress for
the comeback scenario that we so desperately require and that the
middle class and all of America so rightfully deserve.
Mr. COURTNEY. Thank you for taking the time tonight to really set the
record straight on a lot of these issues. I would note that Bloomberg
News actually did a fact check of the Clinton speech the other night
and basically came back and gave it a clean bill of health. Frankly, if
you contrast that with the speeches that took place in Tampa and if you
go to PolitiFact and go through some of the remarks that were analyzed
by that Pulitzer Prize winning service and the number of pants-on-fire
lies that they ascribed to some of the comments that were made on the
floor of the Tampa convention, there is a sharp contrast.
Again, I just want to thank you for taking the time to remind the
American people this evening about the fact that there are items that
we can move forward on today. Literally, we could reconvene the House
here at a quarter of nine on 9/11 and pass a farm bill, pass the postal
reform bill, get moving on the Violence Against Women Act, and we could
deal with the fiscal cliff if people with reasonable and nonpartisan
scorched Earth partisanship came forward and saw what is obvious, which
is that the tools are there to fix these problems. Thank you for your
leadership and for holding this session this evening.
Mr. TONKO. Thank you, Representative Courtney. I thank you for your
outstanding leadership. You've been there on the student loan issue.
You've been there on the ag reauthorization measure. You've been there
on the American Jobs Act.

{time} 2040

We know that there has been a formula for success driven by the
President for the American Jobs Act. He has asked for Congress to move
forward. The Senate has, in a bipartisan way, moved forward with
efforts to address a middle class tax cut. The President has asked us
to complement that with the American Jobs Act that enables us to move
forward with investments in educators, allowing for teachers and class
size to be addressed, making certain that our young people, our
workforce of the future are able to enjoy that self-discovery, that
sense of identity that they require in the classroom. What are their
gifts, their passions, their skills, their talents? How can they best
contribute their fabric to the American scene?
That is part of the American Dream. That is part of the investment
that provides those underpinnings of support, that builds an economy
with capital investment, physical investment, human infrastructure
investment, all of which are required in order to have the holistic
response. With the American Jobs Act formula, the President is saying,
Look, we've grown 30 months of consecutive private sector job growth.
We've enabled the economy to come back powerfully. We're investing in
that order of business.
He's also asked that that public sector element which has been
reduced, that has offset some of the progress, has reduced some of the
progress because of pain at those State capitols putting together their
budgets, he said, Look, let's from a big picture point of view. Invest
in educators, in public safety, in police officers, in firefighters, in
emergency personnel.
On a day like today where we humbly reflect upon the pain this Nation
endured, the loss of lives, nearly 3,000 people impacted by the acts at
the Pentagon, in a lonely field in Pennsylvania, and, yes, in
metropolitan New York, we are reminded most humbly, most sensitively,
most lovingly of that

[[Page H5857]]

dreadful moment. And we saw how important our public safety elements
are, our first responders, critical to that situation. It showcased a
very noble measure in a very painful and dark moment in our history
what those role models are, who they are. That's their everyday work.
It was showcased in a very magnified way. But every day we reach to
their skills, their talents, their strengths.
The President is saying invest in that public safety element, invest
in our firefighters, in our police officers, in our emergency
responders. He's asking for that in the American Jobs Act. We've done
pieces of it, but we need to do the entire package to have the strength
that this economy requires for its comeback.
He talks about infrastructure improvements through an infrastructure
bank that is part and parcel to the outcome, making certain that our
infrastructure is strong and able to move our situation of a comeback.
Commerce requires the shipping of freight. It needs the infrastructure.
Our communities require that investment in infrastructure; otherwise,
they go it the way of a property tax or a less progressive tax
structure.
We know what needs to be done, and the denial here by the do-nothing
Republican Congress is not acceptable. It's painful. It's immoral. It's
insensitive. It's un-American. To put partisanship ahead of partnership
is unacceptable.
We know that the American spirit requires better than that, so we
need to respond to America's working families. We need to respond to
the hope that ought to be delivered to the doorsteps of families across
this great Nation. Our history is replete with investment, investment
to take us to new ages, new elements of success, new impacts on the
world scene.
Earlier, I had spoken of the mill towns that became epicenters of
invention and innovation. It was their product delivery coming out of
the mill towns, out of those 24-hour-a-day operations that impacted the
quality of life, not just in these United States, but in nations around
the world. People were lifted by discovery and product development in
this Nation. And as we move forward, we need to advance our
manufacturing agenda, we need to invest in the research, and we need to
invest in the innovation.
I'm reminded of some of the incubator outcomes at campuses within the
21st Congressional District in upstate New York in the capital region
of Mohawk Valley that I represent, incubators at public and private
sector institutions, clean room science activity going on in lab
formats at community colleges, working with our nanotechnology
industry, our semiconductor industry, advanced battery manufacturing.
All of this requires a plan, a holistic plan that allows for the
unleashing of talent and opportunity from the American public. Someone
before our times invested in our future.
Throughout our noble history, throughout our growth as a Nation,
there were those who believed in America and invested in her people. We
can ill afford to go back. We can only go forward, as was made mention
by the President and many of his administration that were speaking at
the convention, many legislators who appeared at the convention and
spoke about the agenda to constantly move forward, embracing the
American Dream in the process. That American Dream is what inspired so
many to journey to this Nation.

We are, in major fashion, a compilation of journeys. Other than our
Native American sisters and brothers, it's the immigrant population
that traveled to these shores embracing that American Dream, believing
in a brighter tomorrow, understanding that if they put their mind and
heart and soul to work, that better opportunities would be there, that
they could climb the ladders of success, that they would not pull up
those ladders when they reached the mountaintop, but extend additional
ladders to everyone to climb that ladder of success until they reached
that American Dream.
That has been the saga of this great Nation. That has been the
profoundness of this Nation, the greatness of this Nation. Why would we
change course now? We saw what ill effects came of some bad policy or
lack of sound stewardship of our resources. Let's learn from that
history, but let's also learn from the history of greatness where
America struggled through tough times, faced immense challenges, but
powerfully spoke in a way that engaged that American spirit and put it
into policy format, resource advocacy, and budgets that spoke to a
soundness of a future for America.
Our best days lie ahead if we pursue that agenda that shows its
belief and its promise in America's children and working families. The
undeniable progress that we can make speaks boldly to us. We've seen an
administration reach out to this Congress asking for a partnership, a
bipartisan response, one that will allow all of us to share in the
great success that can follow. We've seen what happens when we go
forward with some of the measures of progressivity.
We have a grid system that was challenged as early as 2003, where we
know there is a need for investing in the capacity of that system that
was designed for regional utility matters, and now we're wheeling
electrons from region to region within States to States to States and
from nations to nations. We know that we have to step up to the plate
and invest in that utility infrastructure. We know that there are
deficiencies in our routine, traditional infrastructure that require
our investment.

{time} 2050

We know that there's a need for energy transformation so that we can
grow with the American intellect, that intellectual capacity that
enables us to provide for the innovation, the American independence,
the American security that can be dealt with through renewables, and
energy efficiency as our fuel of choice and outstanding discoveries
that can be made in a way that are most powerful, and research that
equals jobs.
We see it happening all around us, and it's not like we have the
luxury to decide not to do it. We're in the midst of an international
competition.
And unlike the sixties, where it was U.S. versus U.S.S.R., we are now
with many more competitors on the international scene. They are
partnering with their governments. They are partnering in a way that
provides research monies, incubator space, higher-ed communities that
are growing in leaps and bounds while we languish with a do-nothing
Republican Congress that wants to promote delay, insert poison pills,
or just deny progress in a partisanship way that is not speaking to the
American spirit that was imagined and planted by our Founding Parents.
You know, tonight, for this past hour, we as Democrats have enjoyed
sharing our thoughts about what a productive Congress could be in terms
of shaping our future, what a productive Congress could mean to
fairness and justice and equitable opportunity for generations to come.
Our children are watching, they're measuring our actions much more
than by our words, more so by the achievements that we can assess.
They're watching carefully, and we need to move forward in a way that
finds us working together to build consensus. When we insert the ``we''
in us, it is much more powerful than the ``me'' in us.
This House has had great moments when they've rolled up their sleeves
as Members and have come to the table and said, America beckons. Her
people need that sort of response. True leadership will move forward in
a way that allows us to enjoy the taste of success.
You know, tonight, as we've talked about the paralysis that has
gripped this House, as we talked about the denial that has been part of
the outcome that has been demeaning and destructive at times, I reach
to the assessment by very nonpartisan congressional scholars, in this
case Thomas Mann and Norman Ornstein. They have been, over the years,
very much bipartisan in their criticism and critiquing of the behavior
in Congress.
I just want to quote from their report:

In our past writings, we have criticized both parties when
we believed it was warranted. Today, however, we have no
choice but to acknowledge that the core of the problem lies
with the Republican Party. The GOP has become an insurgent
outlier in American politics. It is ideologically extreme;
scornful of compromise; unmoved by conventional understanding
of facts, evidence and science; and dismissive of the
legitimacy of its political opposition.

[[Page H5858]]

Tonight I will close with that statement because I think it's a
challenge. It's a challenge to us to forget about the unproductive
nature of the last several months and move forward with a newfound
order of resolve that will enable us to acknowledge that some of the
greatest moments in American history came with some of her darkest
hours where with that regard, that true American spirit we're able to
rise to the occasion, reach to the best intellect and the best
temperament of this Nation as she came together in an order of
consensus and where our best days followed that sort of agreement.
We can build upon success. We can learn from history, the soundness
of history that saw us respond and rise to the crushing situations that
gripped this Nation and move forward with a sense of greatness, a sense
of accomplishment, a sense of fairness and empowerment and, most
importantly, a delivery of hope to the doorsteps of individuals and
families across this great Nation. America's greatest moments are truly
lying ahead if we can embark upon that challenge before us.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

____________________