[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 101-103]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   GETTING BACK ON ROAD TO PROSPERITY

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Rokita). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 5, 2011, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Gohmert) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Mr. Speaker, it's a privilege to be speaking on the 
floor here this evening.
  Here we've been talking for some time about the huge deficit spending 
that's going on. In fact, Republicans have promised to make massive 
cuts. And the old story that used to be told about the fellow Texan, 
Sam Rayburn, about a young freshman Democrat coming up and talking 
about how difficult things were here in the House and that: Gee, as a 
Democrat, it's obvious the Republicans are our enemy. They're trying to 
stop us from doing what we need to, and, boy, the media's not helping. 
And Speaker Rayburn stopped him, reportedly, and said: Son, the 
Republicans are not your enemy. The media is not your enemy. At the 
other end of the hall, the Senate, now they're your enemy.
  Well, I thought that was a strange story when I heard that about 
Speaker Rayburn, but the longer I've been here, the more we see so many 
great bills that have come out of the House in the last year have gone 
down the hall and are languishing for lack of action. And so when I 
read that a friend down the hall, Leader Reid, was lambasting 
Republicans for a do-nothing status, it was remarkable to me that they 
could have so many House bills sitting down there waiting to do 
something and yet doing nothing with them.
  Now, we have been trying to get bills passed into law that would make 
substantial cuts. It's still, as our friend from east Texas, Bo 
Pilgrim, used to say, a mind-boggling thing to have seen this President 
come in in 2009, with Speaker Pelosi in charge of the House and Leader 
Reid in charge of the Senate, and to know that we had been just 
vilified as majority Republicans in the House in 2006 for exceeding the 
amount of income coming in by $160 billion, vilified, and yet when 
President Obama became the President and Leader Reid and Speaker Pelosi 
were in charge, we ran a deficit of 10 times that much in 1 year. 
Incredible.

                              {time}  1640

  Now one thing that should not have ever happened is to have our 
national security out on the table as a bargaining chip in the debt 
ceiling negotiation. But it was. And we were told that, Gee, neither 
side is going to allow those kinds of cuts to occur to our national 
security.
  And lo and behold, being in Afghanistan, seeing the new year come in 
with our military men and women in some remote operating areas--I went 
with Senator Jim Inhofe from Oklahoma and Joe Barton from Texas--and 
being in remote areas, it was amazing to hear some folks say, We're 
already being told amounts that we're going to be cut because of the 
sequestration coming. Talking with some of our Texas National Guard 
folks, I've been told over the last couple of weeks, We're already 
being told about moneys that are being cut. These are people that are 
trying to protect and defend our country.
  I went to the deployment ceremony of a unit leaving from Lufkin, 
Texas, being deployed as guard. And they're hearing, as they're being 
deployed, about cuts to the amount of money they will have to protect 
them while they're protecting us. Absolutely outrageous.
  As we talk about doing what's best for America and as we hear from 
people around the world that think of the United States as ``the great 
Satan,'' one would think--especially if they studied history--that the 
last thing we would want to do is to hurt our national security, yet 
that is where we're going.
  It seems also clear that those negotiating from the Republican side 
during the debt ceiling bill made an assumption that turned out to be 
false, that the Democrats in the Senate would never allow the 
sequestration of $100, $200, $300 billion from Medicare. That was a bad 
assumption because the same Democratic leadership in the Senate passed 
ObamaCare, which brought about $500 billion in cuts to Medicare. So of 
course they were going to be willing to allow sequestration because 
this time they would be able to blame Republicans for also being part 
of what caused the cuts. Cuts to Medicare and cuts to our national 
security, not a good idea. Not a good idea.
  National Review Online had an article out in the last couple of days 
with some great information; and we have taken that information and put 
it in short form from the article and double checked; and apparently, 
these are accurate numbers. These numbers, if anybody cares to contest 
them, actually come from President Obama's own Office of Management and 
Budget.
  It turns out that as this President and his administration have 
complained about not having money, not having the ability to make cuts, 
having to make draconian cuts to Medicare and to our national defense, 
his administration has been sitting on money, hundreds of billions of 
dollars of money that they haven't spent from 2010 and 2011. They're 
complaining about not being able to even cut $5 billion or $10 billion 
when it turns out they're sitting on hundreds of billions of dollars 
that have not been obligated, have not been spent from 2010 and 2011.
  So let's take a look at the money that this administration has not 
been willing to cut, even though it's unobligated, it's unspent, it's 
been appropriated, they have the ability to spend it or save it or 
spend it for something else. And yet this administration just can't 
seem to want to cut loose from this money to reduce the deficit, to cut 
down on the money we borrow from China, to cut down on the deficit 
spending or the reduction in spending for the military, reduction in 
spending for Medicare. How about that? It turns out they're sitting on 
all this money.
  The Department of the Treasury, under the direction of Secretary Tim 
Geithner--hopefully he will be okay getting his tax return in this 
year. He is sitting on $226 billion that was appropriated; and yet it 
is sitting there unobligated, unspent. Yet Timothy Geithner has told 
us, you know, there's just no money to do what he feels needs to be 
done. He was out there this summer saying, We've got to raise taxes 
because this poor gentleman was not going to be able to cut loose, as 
we find out, of the $226 billion he's got sitting in change. And that 
is not even including the $125 billion that he still has in TARP assets 
or money, and it's estimated by some to be maybe about $50 billion in 
additional assets. So around $170, $175 billion remaining from TARP,

[[Page 102]]

$226 billion sitting there appropriated. I guess that means we've 
already borrowed 42 cents of every dollar from the Chinese. So we're 
sitting on it.
  Then the Department of Defense. Since we've got $78 billion that the 
Defense Department has unobligated--it has been appropriated but 
unspent--why couldn't we use some of that $78 billion to help eliminate 
some of the cuts that are being suggested--in fact, being demanded of 
Defense?
  You've got the Department of Transportation with $45 billion in 
unobligated, unspent money from 2010 to 2011. You've got $40 billion 
from the Department of Health and Human Services sitting there 
unobligated, unspent from 2010 and 2011. Department of Housing and 
Urban Development, $23.8 billion sitting there. Department of 
Education, $19 billion.
  And the thought comes, What if we did away with the Department of 
Education and all that money that comes pouring into Washington every 
year--some of it borrowed--and it gets held here in Washington and gets 
funded to administrators and bureaucrats that have nothing to do with 
actually teaching anything, how about if we just turn that right around 
and send it right back to those States and say, We're taking our grimy 
fingers off of that money; we're not going to keep any of it because we 
think it is that important that it go for education? And how about if 
we, by doing that, therefore, encourage every State--as I believe it 
was Newt Gingrich who suggested to then let go so many of the 
administrators in each State capital that are not involved in any kind 
of teaching, just involved in dictation to local school boards? And of 
course for every bureaucrat that we have to have right now in 
Washington, they have to have at least one in every State capital 
because they've got to carry out the assignments from Washington. And 
then for every one in the State capital, you've got to have bureaucrats 
at each local school district to carry out those assignments.
  I was shocked to go online and see that one of the best school 
districts in east Texas was saying that they were proud to note that 
half of all their school district employees were actually teachers.

                              {time}  1650

  So when I went to look at that a little further, you go back to 
before President Jimmy Carter created the Department of Education. That 
number was closer to 75 percent in Texas. Now it's around 50 percent in 
Texas. But before there was a Federal Department of Education, about 
70, 75 percent of all Texas education employees were just wonderful 
school teachers, like my mother, like my sister, like my wife was. Now, 
that's getting teachers, that's getting people in the education system 
where they can do some good.
  So you have the Department of Education sitting on $19 billion. You 
go online and look up how many school districts there are in America, 
and divide them into $19 billion, you'd have school districts that were 
not having to fire teachers right now. That would do a world of good.
  But we've got bureaucrats here in Washington that think it is more 
important that they sit there with a slush fund, $19 billion 
unobligated, unspent funds from 2010/2011.
  You've got the Department of Labor. They've got $18 billion sitting 
there from 2010 and 2011. And we acknowledge it is important for them 
to sit on a slush fund because they have so many things they have to 
do, like they have to run to States like South Carolina and tell them, 
you can't have a new Boeing plant in your State because we're trying to 
help unions in Washington. Even though not one single union worker in 
Washington was going to lose their job or be adversely affected, we're 
going to rush in and be, not a referee, we're going to be a player/
referee, and we're going to dictate, like used to be done by caesars, 
kings, czars, emperors, pharaohs.
  They thought they had the authority to come into South Carolina and 
play Pharaoh and say, nope, you're not going to have these jobs. Well, 
once the unions finally got satisfied, then isn't it amazing that the 
NLRB backed off some. I think we've seen the NLRB is something we could 
do away with, and one of our colleagues in our party here in the House 
has a bill that will do just that. I think it's time to do that.
  Department of Agriculture, $14 billion sitting unspent, unobligated 
from 2010/2011.
  The Department of State, they don't have quite as much money sitting 
there as some of these other departments, but they still have $8.7 
billion sitting unobligated, unspent from the last 2 years.
  Department of Homeland Security, $7.2 billion. Now, they may want to 
use some of that to go buy some more of these machines from our friend, 
Secretary Chertoff. What a waste of money those were.
  Then you've got the Department of the Interior at $6.7 billion 
sitting unspent, unobligated in their coffers.
  Department of Energy. The Department of Energy that was set up by 
President Carter, with the purpose of getting us off of dependence on 
foreign oil, and every year the Department of Energy has existed one 
thing has been consistent. And we've got to give them credit for this. 
One thing has been very consistent from the Department of Energy. Every 
year they've existed we've become more dependent on foreign oil.
  So if you're in the private sector, and you went all these years, 32 
years, working on 33 years or so, with a department in your business 
that got further and further from its original goal, you'd probably 
cancel that department, get rid of it, disband it. Not here in 
government. Not only are they not doing what would help America by 
getting us off dependence on foreign oil, they are actually working in 
conjunction with the Department of the Interior to make us more 
dependent on foreign oil, and to limit the amount of production here in 
the United States.
  Just today, the President of the United States has had the incredible 
nerve to step up and say, there are thousands and thousands and 
thousands of Americans who I am going to deprive of the opportunity to 
have a good union job. And there are thousands and thousands and 
thousands of more Americans who would be suppliers for those people who 
would be working on the Keystone pipeline, everything from private 
suppliers to people that work in steel plants that would be providing 
the pipe, to be providing the materials that would be used, that would 
be building the heavy equipment that would be used, all of those 
thousands and thousands and thousands of ripple jobs that would be 
coming, this President today is saying, I am not going to allow you to 
have that kind of job.
  We're going to keep pushing, the President might as well have said, 
to make sure you can get unemployment for 99 weeks, and we can keep you 
from reaching your God-given potential of actually producing, because 
there is a great deal of satisfaction for doing something productive, 
seeing the products of your hands. That's why, as my wife would tell 
you, I actually enjoy getting out in the backyard on weekends, kind of 
tough during the winter, but actually getting out there and doing 
things, so that when I finish I can see I've done something productive, 
because we come up here and we pass some good legislation in the House, 
it never becomes law.
  We pass things and encourage the President to get the Senate to help 
us pass off on things so people could become productive, and they could 
get their own jobs and become productive and they wouldn't need to 
become so dependent on the Federal Government. It gets pretty 
frustrating.
  But you've got a Department of Energy sitting there, $5.6 billion 
unobligated, unspent from the last 2 years.
  Department of Veterans Affairs. You would think that with all of the 
veterans who need assistance, who need help, who have problems, both 
psychologically, physically, that some of that $5.2 billion that's been 
sitting there for the last couple of years, it could have been used to 
help our veterans, you would think. Our veterans need help.

[[Page 103]]

  President Bush, right before he left office, had asked a retired 
military, retired Army General to do an assessment of the VA and make 
recommendations. He had some good recommendations. Unfortunately, 
they've not been carried out by this administration.
  But one of the things he told me personally, privately, he said, the 
problem with the Veterans Administration is they're supposed to be an 
assistance organization, and, instead, they think they're an 
adversarial organization. They should be assisting our veterans. And 
yet, so often, every time a veteran comes through the door needing 
help, they look at them as if they're a thief coming in to steal 
something. Our veterans deserve better than that.
  There are some VA clinics, VA places, you know, in Lufkin, I keep 
asking our veterans--even though I did 4 years in the Army I'm not 
entitled to this care, but I want to make sure that our veterans get 
what they think is best for them. People around Lufkin that go to that 
clinic, they say, hey, I would far rather go to this VA clinic than any 
other medical facility.

                              {time}  1700

  Other places I hear from veterans that go to other clinics that say, 
I'd just as soon you give us a card and let us go to any doctor or any 
clinic we want. But at the same time all of this is going on, and we 
were told there now is a need to increase the contribution for veterans 
for TRICARE, we find out there's $5.2 billion that has been sitting 
there unspent, unobligated for the last couple of years.
  Department of Justice, $1.9 billion here that we have them coming in 
before our committee whining and moaning about all of the millions and 
millions of dollars they need. Turns out they've got $1,900 million 
that they could use instead of coming begging here for more money from 
Congress.
  You've got other independent agencies and miscellaneous: $82 billion 
unobligated, unspent; Office of Personnel Management $55 billion. I 
know that the administration spends more money than any other 
administration in history, far and away a lot more, but you would think 
that they wouldn't have to come demanding more and more money and put 
pressure on Harry Reid down in the Senate to get more and more out of 
the House because they just can't live on the $55 billion slush fund 
they have from the last couple of years unspent.
  International assistance programs, $45 billion. I've said it over and 
over, but it is absolutely true. I've seen it firsthand going around. 
You could even see it in some areas of Afghanistan. You don't have to 
pay people to hate you. They'll do it for free. It would save a lot of 
money.
  I still have a U.N. voting accountability bill. I filed it my fourth 
time in this fourth Congress I've been in. It says unless you vote with 
the United States over half the time in the U.N. that you shouldn't get 
any foreign assistance from the United States. Again, these people in 
foreign countries that hate us, it is absolutely their right to do so. 
But we don't have to pay people to hate us. They'll do it for free.
  Environmental Protection Agency, one of those things that was created 
when Congress made the mistake of giving the Nixon administration the 
power to consolidate and reorganize government and make it more 
efficient. The Nixon administration created the Environmental 
Protection Agency. And right now, the EPA is in the process of costing 
thousands and thousands and thousands of people jobs all over America, 
and this administration is doing nothing to rein them in.
  Some people have said, well, can the Congress do something about 
that? Sure we can. We can get rid of the EPA. I've been told by some 
Federal authorities: But you don't understand. Even though Texas has an 
environmental commission, the TCEQ, there are a handful of States that 
don't have environmental commissions for their States, so we need one 
for the whole country. What happened to the Ninth and 10th amendment? 
If it is just inside the State, doesn't involve interstate commerce, 
then why shouldn't we let the States take care of those issues? 
Instead, the EPA is spending some of their slush fund money to sue 
States like Texas and others, shutting down power plants.
  And I would have thought today that when the President released his 
statement about why he was going to deprive tens of thousands of 
Americans jobs immediately where they could earn their own way and own 
their own things without the government handouts, that he would at 
least be able to say, ``Because I have a better plan of getting us off 
foreign oil.'' That's not what he said.
  Apparently, it's the President's position he wants to get us off 
oil--not off foreign oil, just off oil. He wants to put more people out 
of work, increase the cost of gasoline and diesel, which means 
increasing the cost of everything you buy in America because 
transportation costs have to be figured in.
  The one good thing about the President killing the Keystone pipeline 
that you have to acknowledge with money like the EPA has, $4 billion, 
and Transportation, $45 billion sitting there in their slush fund 
unobligated, unspent from the last 2 years, different other Agencies, 
Departments, Department of the Interior, by cancelling the Keystone 
pipeline, they won't have to spend money checking it out, regulating, 
making sure things are done appropriately. They can spend these 
hundreds of billions of dollars, if they care to do so, on more 
Solyndras. Isn't that a great thing?
  We will be able to fund more crony capitalism. Somebody wants to come 
in and claim they're going to create some kind of solar product, then 
this administration will take a good look at it; and there's a good 
chance if you're a Republican you can forget it, but if you're not, you 
may very well be the next Solyndra to get money appropriated for you. 
And heck, we may even have one of the administrations step in when the 
United States, as a creditor, wants to stand in line and get repaid for 
loans that are made and downgrade those loans and put other unsecured 
creditors in front, just as the administration did in the bailout of 
the auto manufacturers, turn the Constitution upside down, deprive 
people with property of due process. There's a lot of good money to do 
those good projects that the President has been doing for the last 3 
years.
  So, Mr. Speaker, I hope that in the days ahead, as people hear more 
and more complaining and whining from the administration about there 
not being any money, gee, we're going to have to raise taxes, I hope 
that there will be people in America that will look at these figures 
and say: Enough whining. Let us tell you about a shortage of money. You 
keep taking our money in taxes and sitting on it in your Departments. 
Enough is enough. It's time to be accountable. It's time to let money 
be in the hands where it is earned so we can get this economy going 
again.
  One thing is for sure. Even though we've spent more money than any 
nation in history no matter how you want to look at it, whether it's in 
dollars or whether it's in percentage of GDP, this administration has 
been on a course for ruin; and I just hope that as this administration 
continues to follow the lead of countries like Greece, Italy, Spain, 
others in economic trouble, that hopefully, before we go over the cliff 
with them, there will be enough of us that can stop the wagon train and 
get us back on the right road to prosperity.
  Quick recap: $687 billion that has been appropriated or unobligated, 
unspent from 2010 and 2011, so we shouldn't hear any more bellyaching 
about there being a shortage of money by this administration. It's time 
to help the American people, not the bloated government.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________