[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 164 (Wednesday, December 19, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H7356-H7358]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         WISDOM THROUGH PRAYER

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 5, 2011, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Gohmert) for 30 minutes.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Madam Speaker, first I think it's important to let the 
people of Connecticut who have suffered so and lost loved ones know 
that they will continue to be in our thoughts and prayers. It is such a 
difficult time, and they need our support. It is a difficult time. I 
think so often when we look for wisdom in different places, I believe 
what Proverbs said, Solomon should have known:

       The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom.

  In the early days of our country, people sought wisdom through 
prayer. The Constitutional Convention, when they could not reach an 
agreement after nearly 5 weeks, 80-year-old Ben Franklin stood up and 
the contentiousness stopped.

                              {time}  2130

  Someone wrote that George Washington looked like he had a very much 
relieved look on his face. 80-year-old Ben Franklin was overweight, 
suffering not only from gout but from arthritis, had a cane, had to 
have help getting up and down sometimes; but his mind was still 
brilliant. That's when he pointed out why we have not once thought of 
humbly applying to the Father of lights to illuminate our 
understanding. We have his whole recorded speech because he recorded 
it. He wrote it in his own handwriting. Madison was taking notes, but 
we have Ben Franklin's speech, and it has provided such solace to me.
  He pointed out to his friends that there were times when every one of 
them could remember back during the Revolution when they asked God for 
specific things and God answered their prayers. That was all part of 
the Constitutional Convention, and he said these words:

       Our prayers, sir, were heard, and they were graciously 
     answered. If a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His 
     notice, is it possible an empire could rise without His aid? 
     We have been assured, sir, in the sacred writings that, 
     unless the Lord build the house, they labor in vain that 
     build it.

  Then he went on. He said:

       I also firmly believe, without His concurring aid, we shall 
     succeed in our political building no better than the builders 
     of Babel: We shall be confounded by our local partial 
     interests, and we, ourselves, shall become a byword down 
     through the ages.

  Then he went on to make a motion that just as they had during the 
Revolution with the Continental Congress that this Constitutional 
Convention Congress should begin every day with prayer.
  So he made the motion and there was great discussion; but unlike the 
Revolutionary days, they didn't have money. This was a Constitutional 
Convention that had just convened. These people came together to write 
a Constitution. They didn't have money as a body. They had no chaplain. 
They couldn't afford to hire a chaplain, and they figured only with an 
independent chaplain that they could agree on could they have somebody 
come in and lead each day with prayer as they had during the 
Revolution. So that was put off until such time as they could hire a 
chaplain, which happened as soon as we became a Nation and the 
Constitution was ratified.
  But Randolph from Virginia followed up Ben Franklin's motion. He 
said, Okay. Basically, they're saying we don't have money to hire a 
chaplain, but one thing we can do: Here we are at the end of June 1787. 
We're about to celebrate our country's birthday again, our anniversary; 
so why don't we just agree to all go to church together--listen to the 
same pastor, hear the same sermon, worship God all together as a 
Constitutional Convention? They all went to the Reformed-Calvinistic 
Church, and the pastor apparently did an excellent job because, when 
they came back, there was a new spirit. They had their disagreements, 
but there was a spirit of cooperation.
  I heard some of the comments of my friends earlier across the aisle, 
and I know their hearts. I know Donna Christensen has been extremely 
gracious to me, personally. Good people. Good people with the best of 
intentions. I think the world of Joe Lieberman. I was visiting with him 
on Sunday morning of his ideas to have a commission come together and 
not just jump quickly to some politically correct solution. Let's do 
the right thing by America, not a knee-jerk, which like the assault 
weapon ban did nothing. In fact, Columbine occurred during the middle 
of the so-called ``assault weapon ban.'' Every gun is an assault 
weapon.
  The machetes in Rwanda--the worst genocide that we know of in human 
history. 800,000 or so with machetes? Of course, we know during World 
War II that the genocide wasn't just 800,000,

[[Page H7357]]

that it was millions--6 million Jews. They were killed by all kinds of 
means. So we need to be smart about the way we deal with this issue of 
mass murders and violence in our society, and everything should be on 
the table.
  As we continue to remember the loved ones of those who were victims 
of the tragedy at Newtown, Connecticut, things go on here in this town. 
This body tomorrow, we've been alerted, will vote on what's being 
called ``Plan B.'' Plan A was to try to reach an agreement with the 
President. From my experience as an attorney, I've negotiated small 
deals, multimillion-dollar deals. I was a district judge, a chief 
justice, a certified mediator. I don't know if there is anybody else in 
the congressional body who has been through the training and process of 
becoming an international arbitrator. I have a lot of experience in 
negotiating from all sides when you see Speaker Boehner go beyond what 
anybody I'm aware of and our conference really wanted him to do 
initially.
  He said, Okay. We will come up with $800 billion of revenue, Mr. 
President, because that's where you had gotten up to. $800 billion is 
what you were demanding before, so we'll cut to the chase. We'll just 
quit negotiating, and we'll give you what you want--$800 billion in new 
revenue.
  The President responded by saying, No, no, no, no. Now I'm at $1.6 
trillion. Now that you're at $800 billion, I'm at $1.6 trillion of new 
revenue wanting.
  What most people who really look at our problem in this town realize 
is that it really isn't a tax problem, that it's a spending problem. 
When we went from the Speaker Pelosi-Harry Reid budget of 2008 that 
ended on September 30 of 2008, I heard no one that year complain that 
the Federal Government is not spending enough money. We were spending 
more money than we had then. Yet in January of '09, after President 
Obama comes in and the Speaker is Pelosi and the majority leader in the 
Senate is Harry Reid, we began spending about $1.6 trillion more than 
we had coming in. We had 2.3 or so trillion dollars coming in in 
Federal revenue, and we were spending about $1.6 trillion more than 
that?
  That's one of the reasons 2 weeks ago I couldn't believe that we were 
voting to eliminate the use of the word ``lunatic,'' because it seems 
to me only a lunatic body would come up with the idea of, gee, we're in 
financial trouble; let's spend more than $1 trillion more than we have 
coming in. That's financially irresponsible.
  As my friend Randy Neugebauer pointed out again this week: A vote 
over taxes that doesn't deal with the massive spending is a vote to 
defer taxes in order to let our children and grandchildren and future 
generations pay the tax because we don't have the moral consistency to 
take care of our own debts. We're going to lay it on future 
generations.
  So, in seeking wisdom, it's part of my belief that you pray; you seek 
wise counsel and read scripture. In doing that, I find as an old 
history major--I went to Texas A&M. I knew I was going into the Army 
for 4 years. I loved history, so why not major in history? You learn so 
much from history. I thought I remembered these words, and I was able 
to find them. So, Madam Speaker, I want to finish the evening tonight 
with these words. These are brilliant words.

                              {time}  2140

  These are words of wisdom from a man named John Boehner. This is an 
article. It's basically a transcript that was done by Major Garrett, 
October 25, 2010. This was 8 days before the 2010 election, which 
turned out to be the largest conservative-wave election in American 
history. So I will just read basically the transcript. It's an article, 
but it's really a transcript. It says that Representative John Boehner 
is interviewed in his Capitol Hill office March 10, 2010, but the 
article is dated October 25, 2010.
  The National Journal representative said:

       About 3 weeks before the 1994 elections, I asked you if 
     House Republicans were ready to win the majority and ready to 
     govern the House. You said then that sometimes the wave takes 
     you into power whether you're ready or not. It did then. It 
     may now. What is similar to you about the 1994 cycle? And 
     more important, are you ready to lead now and will you lead 
     differently if you win?

  Minority Leader Boehner said:

       Well, all kinds of things have changed, and there are a lot 
     of differences. But maybe the biggest thing that's different 
     now is near 10 percent unemployment. I mean, we're going to 
     have to start making tough choices on spending to give our 
     economy a chance to start moving and creating jobs again. As 
     for me personally, you know I had a front row seat to what 
     worked and what didn't in 1994. And I like to think that I 
     learned a thing or two.

  National Journal:

       If you become Speaker, you will be the first since Tom 
     Foley to have previously chaired a committee. (Foley chaired 
     the Agriculture Committee.) How will your past as chairman 
     and legislator with many bills--No Child Left Behind chief 
     among them--influence your approach to allowing committees to 
     set the agenda and give signals instead of receive them from 
     leadership?

  Minority Leader Boehner said:

       We need to stop writing bills in the Speaker's office and 
     let Members of Congress be legislators again. Too often in 
     the House right now we don't have legislators, we just have 
     voters. Under Speaker Pelosi, 430 out of 435 Members are just 
     here to vote and raise money. That's it. That's not right. We 
     were each elected to uphold the Constitution and represent 
     600,000-odd people in our districts. We need to open this 
     place up, let some air in. We have nothing to fear from 
     letting the House work its will. Nothing to fear from the 
     battle of ideas. That starts with committees. The result will 
     be more scrutiny and better legislation.

  The National Journal:

       Related to this it has often been said by those closest to 
     you that you respect and admire and believe in regular order. 
     What does that mean to you and how much institutional value 
     do you place on placing regular order at the center of House 
     procedures and House reforms?

  Minority Leader Boehner:

       Yes, I do, absolutely. The House is the body closest to the 
     people. That's by design. We're the crucible, the testing 
     ground for new ideas and new policies, and the institutions 
     of the House that have grown up over 200 years of trial and 
     error are the best way to test those ideas and policies. We 
     don't need five Members sitting behind a closed door writing 
     a bill like they did with the stimulus or ObamaCare. It's 
     nuts.

  National Journal:

       If you are Speaker, will you ever bring a bill to the floor 
     that hasn't been true to the 3-day rule?

  Minority Leader Boehner:

       No.

  National Journal:

       That's it? Just no?

  Minority Leader Boehner:

       Right. I can see a scenario like right after 9/11 when we 
     would have to act immediately in a true national emergency, I 
     guess, maybe, but this is a serious commitment. I know it's 
     going to be a pain in the neck, but we're going to do it.

  National Journal:

       Enough about procedure. How worried are you about facing a 
     government shutdown fight with President Obama over cutting 
     spending as much as the Pledge to America promises?

  Minority Leader Boehner:

       Look, Major, our goal is to cut the size of government, not 
     to shut it down. If we take the majority, the President is 
     going to have to realize that he can't keep ignoring the 
     American people. They're out there looking at what the 
     President and Pelosi and Harry Reid are doing, and they're 
     shouting ``stop'' at the top of their lungs. We're going to 
     listen to them, and the President better, too.

  National Journal:

       Deputy Whip Eric Cantor has virtually ruled out a 
     government shutdown. Do you rule it out as a negotiating 
     tactic or as a possible outcome of a budget disagreement?

  Minority Leader Boehner:

       I've said the same thing as Eric. Our goal is to make 
     government smaller, not to shut it down. Jeb Hensarling has a 
     bill that would prevent a government shutdown in the event of 
     a budget standoff. We're going to stay focused on doing what 
     the American people want, and what they want is less 
     spending.

  National Journal:

       Do you anticipate a resolution of the Bush tax cut issue or 
     a lengthy congressional issue in the lame duck session? Or 
     are you girding your Members to deal with both issues as soon 
     as the 111th Congress convenes?

  Minority Leader Boehner:

       Hell, I don't think we need to wait until after the 
     election. Let's come back right now and stop this tax hike 
     and cut spending. That's what we put in the pledge that we 
     want to do right now.

  National Journal:

       A reauthorization of the highway bill is due in the next 
     Congress. Will you, as the GOP leadership, support any 
     increase in the Federal gasoline tax to finance additional 
     road, bridge or highway construction?

  Minority Leader Boehner:

       I've never supported a tax increase of any kind.


[[Page H7358]]


  National Journal:

       Will you extend into the 111th Congress the current House 
     GOP moratorium on earmarks? Related to that, if you win the 
     majority, will you seek any change to the Appropriations 
     Committee's professional staff or other reforms to signal 
     that, in your words, ``business as usual'' is over when it 
     comes to discretionary spending?

  Minority Leader Boehner:

       Look, I've always had a no earmarks policy. I helped get 
     the conference into a place where we have a current 
     moratorium. And I think it's perfectly clear that going back 
     to business as usual is not an option. That's the case with 
     earmarking specifically, and with spending in general. Change 
     is never easy, but change is necessary. It's what the 
     American people are demanding of us.

  National Journal:

       You've said you are open to having spending-cut legislation 
     come to the House floor each week or, at a minimum, 
     regularly. How do you intend for this to work?

  Minority Leader Boehner:

       Well, I think a model for that particular proposal may be 
     the YouCut project that Eric and the other members of our 
     economic recovery solutions group have been doing all year. 
     They've got a ton of specific cuts, chosen by the American 
     people in an online poll. I also said in my speech in 
     September at AEI that I think we need to look at breaking up 
     all these massive spending bills--break them into smaller 
     bills that are more conducive to scrutiny and debate. We said 
     in the pledge that we need to set up a process that makes it 
     easier to cut spending. In my mind that means, among other 
     things, if a Member has an amendment that would cut spending, 
     it should get a vote. Period.

                              {time}  2150

  Skipping down.
  National Journal:

       How much longer do you envision staying in Congress? And, 
     related to that, did you learn anything valuable from the 
     speakership of Nancy Pelosi?

  Minority Leader Boehner:

       Hell, I've already stayed here a lot longer than I ever 
     thought I would. We'll see. I think the current majority has 
     reinforced what I already knew. You can't run this place, at 
     least not well, by shutting out the American people, shutting 
     out the other party, and even shutting out your own members. 
     You can twist arms and crack heads and cut deals for a while, 
     but it just won't work in the long term.

  Madam Speaker, with that, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________