[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 7]
[House]
[Pages 9311-9316]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       30-SOMETHING WORKING GROUP

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Kuhl of New York). Under the Speaker's 
announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Ryan) 
is recognized until midnight as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, once again we are coming to the floor 
of the House of Representatives representing the 30-something Working 
Group. My co-chair will be here shortly, Congressman Kendrick Meek from 
Florida. And we want to thank our minority leader, Ms. Pelosi, and Mr. 
Hoyer and Mr. Clyburn, Mr. John Larson, our vice chair of our caucus, 
for allowing us the opportunity to come down here and speak not only on 
behalf of our caucus but on behalf of what we feel to be the opinion of 
many of those folks out in the country that are facing some of the 
challenges that have come from the legislation, that has come out of 
this Chamber, and has in many ways burdened them and their families 
because of the lack of leadership, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, that has 
been coming out of this Chamber and out of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
  Www.HouseDemocrats.gov/30-Something for those Members and loyal fans 
who would want to drop us an e-mail about their opinion of what we are 
saying here, an opinion of what is going on in the government.
  I would like to start off today talking a little bit about unfairness 
and lack of investment in the future of the United States of America. 
This is a chart that is the Republican tax plan, an overview. And this 
overview will show you who is benefiting most from the tax cuts that 
the Republican majority has passed over and over and over again; and 
how this tax cut has disproportionately favored those people who make 
more than a million dollars a year.
  Now, I think it is important, Mr. Speaker, for all of us to 
understand at this juncture that we do not have any money to give back 
in the form of tax cuts. We are borrowing $500 billion a year from the 
Chinese Government, from the Japanese government, from the OPEC 
countries, and borrowing that money and giving it back to the 
wealthiest people in our country in the form of tax cuts for 
millionaires, $16 billion in corporate welfare for the energy 
companies, primarily the oil companies.
  So when you go to the gas pump, Mr. Speaker, and you ask yourself why 
is gas so high and the oil company profits so high and then you 
actually think about public tax dollars going to subsidize the oil 
industry, that really gets your goat. So not only are your gas taxes 
high, your gas prices are high, but the public tax dollars that you 
send down here instead of going into education, instead of going into 
health care, instead of going into broadband service for all of the 
citizens in the country, instead of going to clinics, instead of going 
into all of these art programs and sports programs across the country, 
Mr. Speaker, the American tax dollar is going to subsidize the most 
profitable industry in the entire country. $16 billion is going from 
the pockets of hardworking Americans all over the country to the oil 
companies.

                              {time}  2315

  It is that simple, Mr. Speaker. It is that simple, and what we want 
to talk about tonight is how a Democratic majority in this House will 
begin to reform and transform these horrendous decisions that have been 
made and get our country going in a direction that is going to benefit 
all.
  We will ask, as Democrats, everyone to contribute and we will ask and 
demand that everyone benefits from those basic contributions. We are 
going to challenge this country to move forward in a direction that is 
going to benefit everybody, and the days of we are going to take the 
public tax dollars and we are going to give them to this special 
interest group that is in the oil industry and we are going to let them 
move forward, those days are going to be over as of January 3, 2007.
  We need a government, we need a Congress, we need an executive branch 
that is dynamic, that is mobile, that is agile, that can move in the 
context of an information economy. As businesses are going down the 
road, government is holding them back because we are not investing in 
our workers. We are not investing in education. We are not investing in 
making sure people are healthy.
  To just illustrate how terrible the decisions have been, when you 
look at all the problems in our country, when you look at college 
tuition costs doubling, when you look at health care costs going up by 
10, 15, 20 percent a year, when you look at the lack of investment into 
K-12 and the unfunded mandates from No Child Left Behind, when you look 
at all this and then you have the backdrop of what the Republican 
Congress is doing night in and night out in the United States Congress, 
this chart is the Republican tax plan.
  Now, I know my friend Mr. Meek, we are probably two of the more 
conservative Democrat Members. I am the most conservative Democrat 
Member in the Ohio delegation. Now, we would

[[Page 9312]]

love to go to all of our constituents and say you all get a tax cut; 
this is going to be great. It would be good for us politically to be 
able to say that. Look what the Republicans are doing.
  This big yellow bar here is what a millionaire got in the 2006 tax 
reconciliation bill. They will get $42,000 back. A millionaire will get 
$42,000 back. If you make $500,000, you will get $4,500 back. If you 
make $200,000, you will get $1,395 back, and then if you make $100,000 
you will get $400 back. If you make $40,000, you will get $17 back.
  Is this not disproportionate? If those people who say, Mr. Speaker, 
well, the millionaire pays more in tax, we do not have the money to 
give these people to begin with. We are borrowing the $42,000 from 
China to give the millionaire a tax break. We do not have money to give 
anybody, let alone the wealthiest people in the country, give them 
$42,000 back. We are borrowing the money, Mr. Speaker. We are borrowing 
money from China to give a millionaire $42,000 back.
  Now, if you think that is good public policy, then you need to make 
sure that you vote for your Republican Member of Congress because this 
policy will continue. Guess what, in 10 years your kids are going to 
have a big bill that is going to come in the mail to them that they are 
going to have to pay the taxes, the debt, the deficit, the bill to the 
Chinese Government, to the Japanese government, to the OPEC countries, 
that the money went to pay a millionaire $42,000 back.
  Those people who think that this money, the $42,000 that a 
millionaire gets back, is going to somehow get invested back into the 
American economy, they have not been around for the last 15 or 20 years 
because this millionaire is taking their $42,000, Mr. Speaker, and they 
are putting that in an international fund that is going to yield good 
returns. They are going to invest that money in a stock that is going 
to invest in a business in China, in Asia. That is what is going to 
happen. Where is the benefit to the American people?
  All we are saying is that we need to begin to invest in the common 
good. Everybody contributes, everybody benefits.
  I would love to go tell this person, and I do not know many people 
like this made more than $1 million last year. I am from Youngstown, 
Ohio. Niles, Ohio and Akron, Ohio, is the district I represent. I would 
think that we would have the courage to ask this person to please pay 
their fair share, that they are getting a tax cut of $42,000 and we 
have got to borrow it from China, do you still want it? We are giving 
$16 billion to the oil companies. Please, someone in leadership in the 
United States Government, in the Republican party who controls the 
House, the Senate and the White House, somebody in the Republican party 
call in Lee Raymond, call in one of these CEOs from one of the oil 
companies and just say to them, we do not have $16 billion to give you 
in corporate welfare, I am sorry. I know we may have had a deal before 
the election, but you know what, I am sorry, and we do not have that 
money now for you, and we have to invest that money in the broadband 
access for everyone in the country; we have got to invest that money 
into reducing the costs of college education; we have got to invest 
that money into increasing the health and welfare of the general 
public; we have got to fund No Child Left Behind; we need more 
engineers and scientists; we need 3 million health care workers in the 
next decade or so. We need 1 million nurses in the next decade or so.
  I would be happy to yield to my friend Mr. Meek.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Speaker, it has just been truly a pleasure 
watching you share not only with the Members, Mr. Speaker, but also 
with the American people, and we wonder how we got to where we are now. 
I am just wondering how did we got to where we are now?
  Mr. Speaker, I think we have gotten there because of this rubber 
stamp that is here. It is not just a rubber stamp. It is the Republican 
Congress rubber stamp, and it is very, very unfortunate that the people 
that are paying the price for this rubber stamp are the American people 
at the gas pump. This is graduation time. A lot of parents are going to 
see their children walk across the stage, but guess what, college 
assistance and affordable loans will not be there for those children 
because we are willing to give $42,000, $43,000 in tax breaks to 
millionaires.
  The Republican Congress says they gave tax cuts for the American 
people. Yes, they are American people, too, but I am not talking about 
the middle class. The middle class family does not consider themselves 
millionaires.
  I am holding this rubber stamp because this is what got us here. Mr. 
Ryan talks about paying for that. Let us put that rubber stamp over 
here.
  How we are paying for it is we are making history in all the wrong 
places: 224 years, $1.01 trillion borrowed, Mr. Speaker, over 224-year, 
42 Presidents combined, $1.01 trillion. The Republican Congress and 
President Bush, he could not do it without the Republican Congress, has 
been able to borrow $1.05 trillion over just 4 years. 224 years versus 
4 years, even though we are at war, even though we have little health 
care for Americans, if any, and Mr. Speaker, we have given out tax 
breaks to the oil companies.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. So you are saying that that money that we are 
borrowing could pay for tax cuts.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. And the special giveaways and special interests.
  Let me just quickly, I just want to make the point here. Oil 
companies, look at the subsidies and look at the profits. They have 
reaped $113 billion in record breaking profits in 2005; 2004, $84 
billion; 2003, $59 billion; 2002, $34 billion. It is coincidental, Mr. 
Speaker, that after the meeting at the White House with the oil 
companies, that was uncovered, after they denied all of this, that they 
were a part of the working group, that the profit level went up.
  Now, I am not just a Member with a conspiracy theory, but just the 
other day in the Democratic Caucus, we had a gentleman that came to 
speak to us about alternative fuel sources. The question was asked, 
well, is not the oil companies, I mean, they have commercials going on 
talking about how they are investing in alternative fuels. This is an 
actual shot of a pump at an ExxonMobil station. Here you have regular, 
you have special and then you have super plus.
  But this is the interesting part, Mr. Speaker, because this is the 
ethanol part here that says E-85 which is an alternative fuel. Guess 
what is happening here. This sign here, and I hope that, Mr. Speaker, 
the Members can see it. You cannot use your Mobil credit card.
  So basically what they are saying is that you can use your credit 
card for the gas because we want to keep you on this stuff, but if you 
get a vehicle with alternative fuels, even though you are a customer of 
ours, you cannot use our card for that fuel. Now, I guarantee you I can 
walk into the little food mart here at that ExxonMobil and buy a case 
of sodas if I wanted to with my ExxonMobil card. Someone who is a 
smoker can buy eight packs of cigarettes.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Sunflower seeds.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Sunflower seeds, what have you, but we cannot 
buy alternative fuels.
  Now, meanwhile, back at the ranch, I see the ExxonMobil CEO on The 
Today Show, and he is saying, oh, we believe in innovation and 
alternative fuels, but that is not what it is saying at the pump, Mr. 
Speaker.
  So I think that when we start looking at what is wrong with the 
Republican majority and what we are willing to do, if the American 
people sees fit to put Democrats in control of this House, that we will 
fight the big oil companies. We will make sure that there is no price 
gouging. It will not be a question of having to appoint a group to go 
out and look at this issue. They will no longer have the kind of open 
access special interests has had in this House and that is a fact. That 
is not fiction; that is fact.
  So I think it is important when you start looking at all the money 
that is being borrowed to fund the millionaire tax break, all the money 
that is being

[[Page 9313]]

borrowed to make sure that special interests get their tax cut and 
their subsidies and all these things, meanwhile the American people are 
paying for it.
  I am not going to pull this stuff off the chart tonight, but these 
are the countries that are owning a part of the American apple pie due 
to the fact they want to have the great American giveaway.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I just want to make one point as you 
were talking about the oil companies. They have really become, and I do 
not say this in a derogatory way, they have become dinosaurs, and the 
Republican majority has just consistently reaffirmed their prehistoric 
nature because we are in a new economy. We are in a knowledge-based 
economy. We are in an economy that can figure out how to not use fossil 
fuels, how to figure out how to use different things. They run the 
gamut.
  Let us invest in those things and figure out a way that we are not so 
dependent on the CEOs who are making $400 million, God bless them, 
retirement package of $2 million tax break, God bless you, but not at 
the expense of everyone else.
  The dinosaur approach no longer works. We cannot have a government 
that just consistently lives in an age that no longer exists.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman 
Schultz), my friend.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I have been listening to both of you banter back and forth about gas 
prices, and what I hear in both of your voices is your desire to get to 
the core of what we obviously are all baffled about which is why. I 
mean, why over the last 15 to 20 years has there not been an effort, 
and let us say in the last dozen years, has there not been an effort to 
make a real commitment to fix this, to head this off at the pass, to 
make sure that our constituents are not consistently having to pay, for 
the foreseeable future, if not forever, more than $3 a gallon for gas?
  I guess because I am the newest among the three of us I have reached 
the conclusion that obviously the Republicans do not have the joints 
that they need on the side of their neck because their heads do not 
appear to go this way. They only go this way, like this bobblehead 
elephant. Apparently, they only know how to say yes, Mr. Speaker; yes, 
Mr. President; yes, CEO of oil companies; I am happy to do your bidding 
in whatever it is that you like.

                              {time}  2330

  Their necks, unlike ours, don't appear to go horizontal, or side to 
side. Because if they did, then their voting record would reflect ours 
and the values of the American people a lot more closely, and they 
would not have voted in favor of the energy bill they put forward last 
summer, when they held the vote open for 40 straight minutes to ensure 
they could twist enough arms to get the bill to pass and give away the 
subsidies and the oil leasing rights that we own as a United States 
Government. And instead of collecting the royalties from the oil 
companies, we gave them away and allowed them to drill essentially for 
free, or to drastically reduce the rate.
  That action and the lack of a commitment to funding alternative 
energy research and the cozy relationship that the Bush administration 
has with the Saudis and with the OPEC leaders, that is what has caused 
us to be in the mess that we are in. And you don't see any commitment 
on the part of the Republican leadership here to make any significant 
change.
  The only place you see an effort to make a significant change and 
take this country in a new direction on oil prices and gas prices is 
through the Democratic agenda, the innovation agenda, where we pledged, 
when we rolled out our innovation agenda under Leader Pelosi's 
leadership, to become energy independent within 10 years. And that is 
possible through the use of ethanol.
  I just saw the gentleman who made that presentation to our caucus on 
CNN the other night for a solid hour, and he literally outlined how it 
was possible for us to begin to make a commitment in agriculture 
through corn, which we are already doing in the Midwest, in your area, 
Mr. Ryan, but also it could be done in my area with sugar cane, in 
Louisiana and in the mid northwest with sugar beets. I mean, it is 
possible for us to really make an effort to invest in ethanol.
  Brazil did it. Brazil is now completely independent of foreign oil. 
They manufacture vehicles that run on ethanol. They have hybrid and 
ethanol-only automobiles. That is something that is entirely possible 
in this country within 10 years. Unfortunately, the heads of the 
Members on this side of the aisle only go one way.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. And the distinction is quite clear. We want to do 
broadband access to every household, we want to be energy independent 
in a decade, we want to fund research and development, and we want to 
have a tax credit for venture capitalists to come in and pump money 
into those industries. The Republican majority wants to give the oil 
companies $16 billion. It is that simple.
  Put us in charge and we will have an energy independent Nation in 10 
years, period. Let's get the country going in that direction, Mr. Meek. 
And like Ms. Wasserman Schultz said, we can use sugar cane, we can use 
ethanol, we can use biodiesel, and we can use wind. We can use all 
these things. And nuclear. We could piece this thing together, but 
there's got to be a commitment to say why do we have all our eggs in 
one basket right now.
  And then you look at the problems in the Middle East and all the rest 
that we have.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. And I actually should have mentioned something 
else. You are a Midwesterner, but we have coastlines in both of our 
districts in Florida, and obviously the United States is surrounded by 
coastline. What was the answer to our long-term and short-term energy 
needs that the Republicans put forward the other day? I mean, 
fortunately, we pieced together enough Members to defeat it, but that 
was to bring oil drilling and natural gas drilling within three miles 
of the coast of this country.
  And it is understandable that a lot of our Midwestern colleagues 
voted to do that, because they are desperate to make sure that 
something happens and there is some movement on this. But had our 
Republican colleagues had a little foresight, had they actually had any 
interest in not, for lack of a better term, no, I won't use that 
expression, had they had any interest in not continuing to give 
significant assistance to the oil industry, then they would have not 
needed to make that short-term, shortsighted last-ditch effort solution 
to prevent minivan moms like me from having to pay $55 in filling up 
their gas tanks, which is what I just did the other day when I was 
driving my kids around.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. The American people expect us to come here and come 
up with solutions; to be creative and figure out how do we fix the 
problem, not to subsidize with the public tax money the very problem 
that we are having. We are making the problem worse.
  Not only are we giving the oil companies more money, but we could 
have cut a deal with them. We could say to the oil companies, you are 
in on it. Make money off it. Hire people, do ethanol. You are in. Make 
money. Make lots of money. But don't do it at the expense that we are 
having now, the expense of the American people.
  I think when you look at our agenda, when you take a real look, and 
this isn't about, Mr. Speaker, being on Fox News or MSNBC and two 
people screaming at each other about who is this and who is that. It is 
not about that. These are real solutions. And anybody who is watching 
this debate or this discussion here, this is about what we have in 
store for the American people. These are our plans: broadband for every 
household, energy independence in the next 10 years.
  Go to our Web site, www.housedemocrats.gov/30something. Go to our Web 
site, see these charts, and look at us. We want to open this

[[Page 9314]]

government up. Look at our plan. Examine it; you will like it. It is 
futuristic. It is about what the country is going to look like in 10 
years.
  I yield to my friend.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Mr. Ryan and Ms. Wasserman Schultz, it is just 
not natural to think that the oil industry, the CEOs, the board members 
of the oil industry will say, well, we want to do the right thing. 
Matter of fact, we are going to take money out of our pockets and 
profits and we are going to put it on the table and we are going to 
make America energy independent.
  It goes against financial logic for them. Their stockholders now are 
making more money than they have ever made in the history of the 
country. When they have their shareholder meetings, Mr. Speaker, they 
do not go there and say, boy, people are paying a lot of money at the 
pump. What should we do? What should we do? No. We are making more 
money than we have ever made in our lives, and we are being subsidized 
by the Republican majority in Congress. What can we do to keep the 
Republican majority in control of the Congress so we can continue 
getting what we are getting? That is what is happening.
  What has to happen on behalf of the American people, they have to 
have a Congress that is willing to say, you know, that is not going to 
happen any more. We are going to make sure we work very hard so we can 
start stroking away from this kind of business here. Folks are talking 
out of both sides of their mouths saying that, oh, we believe in 
innovation and in alternative fuels, yet at the same time denying their 
customers the right to use their credit card to buy ethanol.
  This is on a pump. This is on the pump. This is on the pump. This is 
not something that some environmental group ran out and put a sticker 
on a pump. You can pull up to an ExxonMobil station now and see that on 
the pump. That is very unfortunate, Mr. Speaker. It is not natural for 
that to happen.
  It is not natural for the Republican majority to say, well, Mr. 
President, we don't agree with your tax policy because its wrong that 
we are borrowing money from foreign nations and we are selling America 
way. It is not natural. It is not natural for the Republican majority 
to say we have to have oversight. We have to make sure that we have no 
more Hurricane Katrinas.
  Yes, there were some committees that met and found out the obvious, 
that things went wrong. But there were no solutions that came out of 
the report of the partisan committee here in the House.
  It is not natural for the Republican majority to stand up to 
companies that are raking in record profits off the backs of the 
American people. This is well documented. And, Mr. Speaker, I am not 
even going to beg the Republican majority to do the right thing at this 
point, because history doesn't reflect that they are willing to be 
bipartisan in a way that will benefit all Americans, with making sure 
we work in a bipartisan way.
  One thing our leadership has said and one thing we have embraced here 
in the 30-something Group is that when the American people see fit, 
hopefully in November, if they are willing to have a Democratic 
Congress to stand up to this White House and to stand up to the special 
interests here in Washington, D.C., then we will have bipartisanship. 
Because bipartisanship can only happen when the leadership allows it. I 
am saying the leadership in charge allows bipartisanship.
  Mr. Speaker, well documented. There are conference committees when we 
pass a bill in the House and the Senate that comes together and the 
Democratic members are not even welcome to the conference committee to 
sit and talk about the ideas and exchange with the Senate so we can 
send a positive package to the President of the United States. That is 
not happening.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. Ms. Wasserman Schultz, as I close, and then I am 
going to be quiet, because I just want to make this last little point.
  It is unfortunate that it is not natural for the Republican majority 
to do the right thing. I don't care if you are a Republican or an 
Independent or a Democrat, or you are thinking about voting and you are 
17\1/2\ years old and you can register and vote in November, you have 
to have a problem. Or 17 and about to vote in November, because you 
have to be 18. You have to have a problem the way the Republican 
majority has put this country in a bad posture for the future and the 
present.
  If I don't say anything else tonight, I just want to make sure that 
the Members understand what they are doing to the country. Not to 
Democrats. We are all in this. When we go to the pumps, they don't have 
a price for Democrats and a price for Republicans and a price for 
Independents. We are all paying the same price. We are all paying the 
same price at the pump.
  So when folks pass policy and say, oh, well, we got what we wanted. 
It is not about carrying the Republican leadership on your shoulder 
saying we beat the Democrats on this one. No, you beat the American 
people, and the American people have had enough of it.
  We are here to make it abundantly clear, and we are carrying a 
message on behalf of all our colleagues on this side of the aisle, and 
hopefully a few Republicans on that sides of the aisle, that we are 
willing to lead on behalf of the American people and not K Street, not 
the special interests, not somebody's cousin that happened to get a 
lobbying job that came here to get the right policy here, like they did 
in the White House on these oil companies.
  Am I upset? You're doggone right I am upset. So I just want to make 
sure that we are clear on that, crystal; that everyone understands and 
we break this down so that the average Joe and Sue and Sally can 
understand what we are talking about here.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. You know, what we always try to do here on the 
30-something time is to help people understand that we are not just 
offering our own opinions. And I think it would be helpful to 
illuminate for folks and for the Members, Mr. Speaker, just exactly 
what has gone down here in this Chamber and the opportunities that the 
Republicans have literally just cast aside.
  Let us take a walk down the energy memory lane in the last several 
months, just since I have been here. Ninety-eight percent of House 
Republicans voted to let the oil companies keep their exorbitant 
profits. This was the week of April 28. The vote was on April 27, 
excuse me. And what they did was, the House Republicans rejected a 
Democratic effort to accept Senate provisions in the tax bill that 
would have removed $5 billion worth of subsidies and tax loopholes for 
large oil companies.
  In other words, they would have removed the subsidies and tax 
loopholes worth $5 billion to oil companies, but House Republicans 
refused to do that. Ninety-eight percent of them voted to do that. 
Again, I don't think your rubber stamp is big enough, Mr. Meek.
  Let's talk about price gouging. It is really interesting. Before I 
came here, I was at home for a little while and I was watching CNN and 
saw a Senate colleague, to stay within the House rules, commenting at a 
hearing on oil prices. This was a Senate Republican, and he was using 
very tough talk and grilling the oil companies that were before him. 
Essentially, the announcer, the commentator on CNN, was talking about 
how this particular individual had previously never been in favor of 
legislation and had voted against every opportunity to rein in the oil 
industry and to try to bring some sanity to the direction that we are 
moving in terms of our energy policy.
  But literally I watched him say it, he said to the oil industry 
representative that the American people were getting a little bit 
cranky and tired of this, and that he was getting ready to do something 
serious. What, I don't know, but if we have reached the point where 
even someone who has never voted to regulate the oil and gas industry 
is considering doing that, then you know that the American people have 
reached their breaking point.
  Because in terms of price gouging, it has been a totally different 
story. The

[[Page 9315]]

Republican leadership in either chamber has never supported adopting 
price gouging legislation.

                              {time}  2345

  In September 2005, Democrats proposed legislation to establish a 
Federal ban, this was a Democratic proposal, a Federal ban on price 
gouging for oil, gasoline and other petroleum products during national 
emergencies; provide civil and criminal penalties for price gouging; 
ban market manipulation; and require greater transparency in oil and 
gasoline markets.
  This was supported by a majority in the Senate, but it was blocked by 
Republicans in the House. And that vote took place on November 17, 
2005.
  So there has never been an interest. In fact, there has been a 
specific interest in continuing to prop up the oil company profits. We 
have third-party validator after third-party validator that back this 
up, so this is not the Debbie, Tim and Kendrick show where we are 
spewing our opinions. There are facts to back up the things we are 
saying. We are hopeful that the American people understand who is for 
true energy independence and moving this country in the right direction 
and who is just kidding.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. I thank the gentlewoman because not only did you 
have third-party validators, I think we have some of the most important 
third-party validators to what we are saying here.
  The next five posters are strong, conservative Republicans with 
credentials in the conservative community well beyond anything we will 
ever have.
  This is Pat Toomey, former Member of Congress, president of Club for 
Growth. He says in the Philadelphia Inquirer on May 8: Republicans have 
abandoned the principles of limited government and fiscal discipline. 
He went on to say: There is a very high level of frustration and 
disappointment among rank-and-file Republicans when they see a 
Republican-controlled Congress engaging in an obscene level of wasteful 
spending.
  This next quote is from a guy who gave birth to the Republican 
revolution in 1994. He said, at the end of March, a congressional 
watchdog agency recently smuggled a truck carrying nuclear material 
into the country to test security; he said: Why isn't the President 
pounding on the table? Why isn't he sending in 16 reform bills?
  Mr. Gingrich went on to cite a series of blunders under Republican 
rule, from failures in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina to 
mismanagement of the war in Iraq. He said the government has squandered 
billions of dollars in Iraq. That is from Newt Gingrich, former 
Speaker, conservative Republican.
  He went on to say in the same article: They are seen, the 
Republicans, and as my good friend from Florida loves to point out, the 
man who gave birth to the Republican revolution, is now calling the 
Republican majority they; they are seen by the country as being in 
charge of a government that cannot function.
  This is not the Democratic Party saying this; these are conservative 
Republicans who had some ideals that see this Republican Congress 
unable to govern the country.
  Pick an issue. The war, down.
  Pick an issue. The prescription drug bill, not working.
  Pick an issue. Hurricane Katrina, FEMA, not working.
  Education costs, through the roof.
  You are in charge. You are in charge of the House and the Senate and 
the White House.
  Pick an issue. Pick an issue in this country, oil prices, gas prices, 
energy costs, health care costs.
  Pick an issue. Unable to govern. Unable to govern. And it is not my 
opinion; it is not your opinion. This is their people saying they do 
not know how to govern.
  We want an opportunity. Then we find out, Tuesday, 26.5 million 
veterans' information is stolen. You cannot consistently run down 
government and then expect it to work.
  Mr. MEEK of Florida. You know why it is breaking down, because 
special interests have been allowed to infiltrate the U.S. House of 
Representatives. The K Street Project until denounced a few months ago 
was alive and well in the U.S. House of Representatives.
  Mr. Speaker, you know it. I know it. The majority and minority know 
it. Articles were written, you have to be a part of the K Street 
Project or you are out of it. There was one Member of this House who 
said if they are not on the list as being a part of the K Street 
Project that is contributing to make sure that Republicans stay in the 
majority here in the House, and that also means if they did not hire 
staffers or ex-staffers that Republican leadership Members asked them 
to hire, they were not going to have access.
  I am going to read this Washington Post article, Wednesday, November 
16, 2005, front page: White House documents show executives from big 
oils companies met with the Vice President's energy task force in 2001.
  Well, let us look at the chart. What happened in 2002 after they met? 
Wow, $34 billion in profits.
  ``Something long expected by environmentalists but denied as recent 
as last week by industry officials testifying before Congress. A 
document obtained this week by The Washington Post,'' and that was 
November 2005, ``shows that officials from ExxonMobil, Phillips, Shell 
Oil and BP, Inc., met in the White House complex with Cheney's aides 
who were developing national energy policies, parts of which became law 
and parts of which are still being debated.''
  The bottom line is it is just not natural for the Republican majority 
to be part of my revolution. Their revolution is making sure that the 
special interests get what they want, not the revolution of 
accountability or any Contract for America that they came up with.
  So they got in majority, and they lost touch with the rhetoric that 
they were sharing with the American people, and look at what happened.
  The facts, after the meeting in the White House complex was 
documented, not the fact that the White House came forward and said, we 
had a meeting; no, we had to do some insight and investigation. And 
guess what? The American spirit broke through, and somebody said, yes, 
there was a meeting, I was there. Not me, but the person who reported 
that. There was $34 billion in profits after the meeting. Let us look 
at the profits here. I think that was a pretty good meeting on behalf 
of the special interests.
  That is why Mr. Toomey is saying what he is saying. That is why Mr. 
Gingrich is saying what he is saying, and that is the reason why the 
average American person is saying, I am not voting party; I am voting 
for my family. I am not voting because somebody said, you are a 
Republican and this is what you have to do. I am not a registered 
Republican, but I guarantee you those people who delivered the 
Republican majority in this House voted for the things that they were 
promised some 12-14 years ago, not what is going on right now here in 
this House.
  If they want a change, they have an opportunity to do it, and we want 
to make sure that everyone knows they have the power, and not to 
believe the rhetoric of the 30-second ad about why you need to elect me 
because the facts are not there on the majority's behalf, the 
Republican majority's behalf, that they are going to deliver for the 
average American worker, the average American senior citizen, the 
average American child that is trying to get an education. Because when 
they walk across that stage this week and next week, they are going to 
pay more than ever for their education, and it comes by way of the cuts 
in the budget to make sure that oil companies and millionaires get 
their tax breaks, and make sure that individuals who are carrying out 
bad policy as it relates to not having a strategy in Iraq continue to 
carry on that bad policy, and no one can wave an Independent or 
Republican or Democratic flag and say what is happening right now is 
good in Congress.
  What we have to do is change the majority in this House to a 
Democratic majority because we have the will and the desire to lead, 
and I believe the American people know. And I believe

[[Page 9316]]

the Republican majority knows it. I think it is going to happen, and it 
is going to happen because of what they have not done and what we are 
willing to do.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to Ms. Wasserman Schultz.
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I actually think you are being presumptuous 
because you touched a nerve when you said you think the Republicans 
lost touch along the way at some point. That presumes that they were 
ever in touch because when we listen to remarks on the floor of this 
House where commentary is made that, for example, people who make 
$40,000 a year do not pay taxes, when you know you pay upwards of $50 
to fill up a gas tank, you scratch your head and wonder, who pumps 
their gas?
  When you cannot determine whether they know what the cost of 
groceries are, are they shopping for food? Who is talking to them in 
their districts? Are they driven around in limousines? Because all of 
the indicators, their desire to maintain tax cuts for the wealthiest 
among us, all of the indicators are there that they really are that out 
of touch.
  I mean, just to have it stated on the floor of this House that people 
who make $40,000 do not pay taxes, that is just unbelievable. But then 
just take the tax cut bill, the rubber-stamp Republican Congress, 
literally and the walk down memory lane that we have been going through 
turned the projected $5.6 trillion record surplus into a record deficit 
of $3.2 trillion. The President has quadrupled our debt held by China. 
The tax bill that was signed, Americans making $20,000 annually get $2 
and Americans making $40,000 get $16.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. Can you imagine somebody getting a $2 tax break?
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. When I ask people in my district in town hall 
meetings to raise their hand and show me how many have benefited and 
got money in their pocket from the tax cut legislation, out of several 
hundred, I get two maybe three hands; that is preposterous.
  Here is the kicker: Americans making more than a million dollars a 
year get a thousand times what people making $40,000 get. They get 
$42,000. We have a graphic that we can show that means that they can 
buy a Hummer. That is essentially, they are basically being given the 
equivalent of a Hummer.
  Let me just conclude by adding on to what Mr. Gingrich has said 
because he also said some things very recently. On May 14, on Meet the 
Press, Mr. Gingrich said: I think we have to confront the fact that on 
a variety of fronts, we are not getting the performance we want. The 
people in charge have an obligation to deliver. When you learn that 
maybe as much as $16 billion of the $18 billion that we sent to Baghdad 
for economic purposes was not spent effectively, you know something has 
to change. When you look at Katrina and you realize that we, the United 
States Government, paid $1.75 to a general contractor who paid 75 cents 
to a contractor who paid 35 cents to a subcontractor, who paid 10 cents 
to put the blue tarp on what was temporary roofing, then you know 
something has to change.
  The leader from the 1994 Republican revolution says something has to 
change. Change is not going from Republican to Republican. It is going 
from Republican to Democrat so we can take this country in the 
direction that we really should be going, and so that the next 
generation of Americans are going to have an America that they can grow 
up and believe in.
  Mr. RYAN of Ohio. We have positions that are right down the middle. 
We have positions about investing that money instead of giving $42,000 
in tax breaks; making sure that everybody has access to broadband; 
making sure people are healthy; and No Child Left Behind is funded; and 
balancing the budget by putting paygo rules on that won't allow us to 
spend money that we do not have, that we do not either cut from a 
program or raise revenue somewhere.
  As we are wrapping up here. I had an opportunity to go to the Kennedy 
Library. Mr. Murtha received the Profiles in Courage Award for his 
stance on the war and coming out against the war. I ran into Ted 
Sorenson, who was President Kennedy's top adviser and speech writer. He 
said, when he was with President Kennedy, they never submitted a budget 
to Congress that was more than $10 billion off. They would maybe have 
some, but never more than $10 billion.
  And when President Bush says this Congress has to rein in spending, 
he hasn't vetoed one spending bill, so don't give us this, and we are 
supposed to believe you. Let us put our faith back in the American 
people here, www.housedemocrats.gov/30something.

                          ____________________