[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 158 (2012), Part 1]
[House]
[Pages 84-100]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




         DISAPPROVAL RESOLUTION RELATING TO DEBT LIMIT INCREASE

  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 515 and as the 
designee of the majority leader, I have a motion at the desk.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Miller of Michigan). The Clerk will 
report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Reed moves that the House proceed to consider the joint 
     resolution (H.J. Res. 98) relating to the disapproval of the 
     President's exercise of authority to increase the debt limit, 
     as submitted under section 3101A of title 31, United States 
     Code, on January 12, 2012.

                              {time}  1410

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3101A(c)(3) of title 31, 
United States Code, the motion is not debatable.
  The question is on the motion.
  The motion was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the title of the joint 
resolution.
  The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.
  The text of the joint resolution is as follows:

                              H.J. Res. 98

       Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
     United States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress 
     disapproves of the President's exercise of authority to 
     increase the debt limit, as exercised pursuant to the 
     certification under section 3101A(a) of title 31, United 
     States Code.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to section 3101A(c)(4) of title 31, 
United States Code, the joint resolution is considered as read, and the 
previous question is considered as ordered on the joint resolution to 
its passage without intervening motion except 2 hours of debate, 
equally divided and controlled by the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Reed) as the proponent and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Levin) as 
the opponent.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.


                             General Leave

  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, 
and I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in 
which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous 
material on the subject of the resolution under consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from New York?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I rise today as the proud primary sponsor of 
the subject resolution that is before the desk.
  Madam Speaker, I'd like to start my conversation with a few numbers: 
$15.2 trillion. That is the size of our national debt. We as a Nation 
are borrowing at the rate of $58,000 per second. That is approximately 
$45,000 for each man, woman, and child in America. This type of debt is 
not sustainable.
  Madam Speaker, this resolution is offered today to send a message to 
the Nation and to the world that this Chamber is going to lead and not 
hide. We are going to deal with the issue of the national debt once and 
for all because it is time. The path that we are on is not sustainable. 
It is a path of bankruptcy, it is a path that will destroy the American 
Dream if we do not stand up to the plate and lead us out of this fiscal 
nightmare that we now find ourselves in.
  Now, many people in this town and in this Chamber and in the Chamber 
on the other side of the Capitol probably would like this issue to go 
away until after the election. The problem is, is that the issue will 
not go away. And even though if we don't want to deal with it 
politically, we need to deal with it substantively. And my resolution 
that is before this Chamber will send a message that the constant 
borrowing on the backs of our children and our grandchildren must come 
to an end.
  I quote the words of our own President when he was Senator in the 
U.S. Senate. The path that we are on is similar to the words he echoed 
and stated in the U.S. Senate Chamber when he said this constant 
borrowing, this national debt is a complete failure of leadership in 
the White House. We need to lead, and that is what we are going to do.
  So I ask for support on this resolution from all of my colleagues, to 
stand with us, make the hard decisions, deal with this issue to stop 
this insanity that is truly a threat to our very Nation. And also, it 
is a threat to any economic recovery that our Nation hopes to enjoy in 
the short term, because if we do not get the debt under control, small 
business America, our entrepreneurs, the people that are going to put 
Americans back to work will not have the confidence or the certainty to 
invest in the American market that is going to lead to real jobs and to 
deal with the problem of our unemployment once and for all.
  So with that, Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  You know, there's a very basic fact--I've listened to the rhetoric--
if House Republicans prevailed on this bill, what would be the result? 
Chaos. Chaos.
  The House Republicans have become the ``party of chaos.'' Six months 
ago, they took us to the brink of default. No one in this country liked 
what they saw--or maybe a very few--not the American public at large, 
surely not the markets, surely not the markets. But apparently House 
Republicans did, and you're at it again.
  Here we are in the first full day in the House when we're in session 
this year debating a measure that would take us immediately back to the 
brink of default. House Republicans are once again relying on the votes 
of others to save them from themselves and to save this country from 
them.
  This is posturing, not legislating. This is rhetoric, not reelection. 
And we've seen this movie before. 174 House Republicans voted for the 
Budget Control Act that set out the structure to keep the government 
functioning and address our long-term debt, but many decided to turn 
tail. And on September 14, 228 House Republicans voted in favor of the 
disapproval resolution to end the President's authority to pay our 
bills. That is what's fiscally responsible, paying bills.
  Basically, they were for it before they were against it. It's a rerun 
of a bad movie when the American people clearly want us to move 
forward. And unfortunately, House Republicans have turned to Washington 
with the same confrontational tone they left when they nearly allowed 
the payroll tax and the unemployment insurance to expire. And I want to 
emphasize that, the same confrontation; instead of a spirit of seeking 
common ground, essentially confrontation. And I think the American 
people have said to you, enough is more than enough.
  House Republicans act as if they don't already have a deadline 
looming, one with vast implications for millions of American families. 
That's what we

[[Page 85]]

should be talking about. In 6 weeks, the payroll tax cut expires for 
160 million Americans, Federal unemployment insurance begins to end for 
more than 3 million people searching for work, and access to health 
care becomes endangered for 46 million seniors and the disabled.

                              {time}  1420

  Well, last month's jobs numbers were encouraging. The private sector 
created more than 200,000 jobs in December and nearly 3 million since 
the recovery began. But with 13 million Americans still looking for 
work, we need to do more. We should be doing everything possible, 
everything possible to ensure that our recovery doesn't falter. And you 
are here supporting something, if it prevailed, that would deeply 
impact our economy and economic growth.
  So here we are in the third week of January. And now we have a 
conference committee on these issues, charged with the payroll tax cut 
and unemployment insurance. But that hasn't yet happened, not for a 
lack of wanting on our part. We've been ready and eager to begin. 
Businesses and families that are trying to plan and budget for the year 
should not have to wait until the 11th hour, once again, for certainty. 
For Republicans, brinkmanship has, I'm afraid, as demonstrated today, 
become the rule.
  So I urge we should reject this cynical, this rigidly ideological 
attempt to take us back to the brink of default. If you prevail, it 
wouldn't take us back to the brink; it would throw us over.
  The resolution, fortunately, is going nowhere. Its only impact will 
serve to divide and distract from addressing the real needs of the 
American people. So I assume--it's happened once before--a majority, 
and maybe a vast majority, of the House Republicans will come down here 
and essentially contradict what they helped to pass. That contradiction 
isn't even good politics, and it's terrible policy.
  I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, what I would like to say is that time has 
passed since we passed the Balanced Budget Control Act. There has been 
no action on the debt. We have seen nothing out of the White House as 
to a plan to deal with this national crisis. And my colleague on the 
other side, I will remind, that I am a conferee on that conference 
committee to deal with the payroll tax rates, to deal with 
unemployment, and to deal with the doc fix.
  We were here at the end of December. I was here over the New Year's 
break, Thursday, Friday, working on it. We are ready to do the work. 
And I'm glad to hear my colleague on the other side of the aisle say 
that now the House Democrats are here to do the work. We do need the 
Senate to join into that conversation, and my hope is that they will 
join into that conversation very soon.
  But we are capable men and women in this Chamber, Madam Speaker. I am 
confident that we can walk and chew gum at the same time. We will deal 
with the issue of the payroll tax rate. We will deal with the issue of 
the unemployment. We will deal with the issue of the doc fix. But we 
will not take our eye off of what is becoming one of the fundamental 
issues of our generation, and that is our national debt. And that's 
what this resolution speaks to and will constantly remind all of us 
that we need to be diligent on this issue to get it taken care of once 
and for all.
  And with that, I would like to yield 3 minutes to my colleague from 
Colorado (Mr. Lamborn).
  Mr. LAMBORN. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman from New York for 
the time and for his work on this vital issue.
  I am opposed to raising the debt ceiling limit. How in the world can 
we raise the debt limit when the Senate refuses to work with the House 
to even pass a budget? The Senate hasn't passed one in 3 years. No one 
would walk into a bank and ask for a loan without a plan on how they 
would spend that money and pay it back. So why is it okay for the 
Federal Government to operate that way?
  It's not.
  The latest increase to the debt ceiling limit allows President Obama 
to borrow an additional $1.2 trillion, which brings our national debt 
to $16.4 trillion, and he will likely be back at the end of the year 
asking for another increase. To put that into perspective, after the 
Revolutionary War, when we became a country in 1776, and after that, 
many wondered if the young democracy could withstand what many at the 
time considered a crushing debt. The Nation had borrowed heavily to pay 
for the Revolutionary War. The debt, when the war was over, was about 
$34 per American which, in today's inflation-adjusted dollars, would be 
about $653. Today's debt, by contrast, is nearly 68 times that size, or 
$45,000 per American. It's bad enough to borrow money like there is no 
tomorrow, but to do so without even a budget in place is simply wrong.
  Today I have introduced a bill to stop this madness. The Budget 
Before Borrowing Act, H.R. 3778, is a straightforward, no-gimmicks 
approach to spending money. It very simply says that the Nation cannot 
raise the debt ceiling limit unless the House and the Senate have 
agreed on a budget resolution. This can only be waived with a vote of 
two-thirds of the Members of both houses.
  To conclude, I am opposed to raising the debt ceiling limit, and I 
urge my colleagues to support this disapproval resolution. With our 
current debt load and lack of a budget, the President has no business 
asking to raise our Nation's debt at this time.
  Mr. LEVIN. It's now my pleasure to yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman 
from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).
  Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Madam Speaker, I rise today in firm opposition 
to this resolution, a political stunt that prevents the increase in the 
debt limit that this Congress has already approved.
  This is a dangerous distraction from our efforts to move the country 
forward, support continued economic growth, and promote job creation, 
and it flies in the face of the Budget Control Act, which 174 House 
Republicans voted for last summer.
  In 2011, my colleagues across the aisle caused multiple self-
inflicted economic crises with the specter of defaulting on our 
Nation's debt each time they played with fire regarding the debt limit. 
The Republican majority simply has not learned that these kinds of 
empty, partisan measures can cause immediate harm to our economy and 
hurt working families everywhere.
  This resolution is nothing but a deeply harmful and dangerous 
charade: dangerous for Americans still struggling to find work, 
dangerous for our economy that is depending on a robust and focused 
recovery, and dangerous for our responsibility as a legislature, tasked 
not with these grand charades of brinkmanship but of safeguarding the 
well-being of our Nation.
  We have already seen America's credit downgraded and have watched as 
other nations have faced the worst of default. It is time to stop 
holding our economy hostage to an ideological agenda. I urge my 
colleagues to reject this resolution and protect the full faith and 
credit of the United States of America.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am happy to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Paul).
  Mr. PAUL. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, we are here today to try to prevent the national debt 
from going up another $1.2 trillion, but in a way, it's a formality 
because most everybody knows the national debt is going up $1.2 
trillion. This is sad because this process is a very mixed effort to 
try to curtail spending. And this power of the President to ask for a 
debt increase, and then we have to get two-thirds of the Congress to 
prevent this from going up, this is a creature of Congress. It's also a 
creature of a mental status here in the Congress of overspending on 
just everything.
  It would be nice if we could blame everything on the current 
administration or even the previous administration. But the crisis that 
we're in has been building over a long period of time, and it's very 
bipartisan. There's been way

[[Page 86]]

too much cooperation in this Congress because those who like spending 
cooperate, and they keep spending. And for a long time, we were able to 
get away with this because we were a very wealthy country. Now we're 
nonproductive. The good jobs are overseas, and yet the spending is 
escalating exponentially.
  We're really not facing up to the reality that the problem is 
spending. Yes, we have to deal with the debt. But the debt is a 
consequence of too much spending. Where do we spend too much money? In 
two places: overseas and domestically. And we need to stop the 
spending.
  Really, in my mind, it started about 40 years ago when there was a 
guarantee that you don't have to worry about debt because we always had 
somebody there to buy the debt. If we would have had a market rate of 
interest where you didn't have the Federal Reserve buying the debt, 
interest rates would go up and would force us to live within our means. 
As long as you have a Federal Reserve there with no linkage to anything 
of soundness--since 1971, the Congress has been reckless, and the 
deficits have continued to grow, and the crisis that we're facing today 
is an inevitable consequence.

                              {time}  1430

  I believe we're in denial here in the Congress. If we had the vaguest 
idea of how serious this crisis is financially, not only for us, but 
for the world, we'd cut spending because you can't solve the problem of 
debt by accumulating more debt. It's just impossible to do this.
  And one other thing that I think we fail to do on both sides of the 
aisle is really cut spending overseas. It is considered that if you 
spend more money overseas you have more defense, and there's no truth 
to that. Just spending over $1 trillion a year overseas doesn't 
necessarily give you more defense. And yet nobody's willing to cut. 
Some of these automatic cuts that are just supposed to be in line that 
come out of the supercommittee, everybody's squirming already. How are 
we going to prevent these cuts?
  And this pretense that we might cut $1 trillion over the next 10 
years is total pretense. We're in total denial that it's cutting 
something. There's a proposed increased baseline budgeting of $10 
trillion. We're going to cut $1 trillion over 10 years? That's $100 
billion a year.
  Our national debt is going up $100 billion a month. So it's really a 
charade. But the American people know it's a charade. They're tired of 
it, and they've heard about this for so long, and we need to make up 
our minds. Are we going to live within the confines of the 
Constitution? Cut the spending and balance the budget and get out of 
this mess.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. REED. I yield the gentleman another 30 seconds.
  Mr. PAUL. But the crisis that we face, as I said, is not just 
domestic because it is a worldwide crisis. And if we don't do 
something, we will be forced, under very dire circumstances, because we 
cannot bail out the world. We are prepared now through our Federal 
Reserve to bail out all of Europe. We've been downgraded, France is 
downgraded, Greece is downgraded, and we believe that all we have to do 
is spend more money and inflate the currency. Believe me, we ought to 
face up to reality and live within our limits.
  Mr. LEVIN. It's now my privilege to yield 3 minutes to the very 
distinguished senior member of our committee, Mr. Charles Rangel of New 
York.
  Mr. RANGEL. I was awed in listening to my friend, Congressman Paul. 
He usually comes up with some farfetched ideas that I have no idea what 
he's talking about. But the truth of the matter is that he is right. 
America is walking down a very serious economic path that could not 
only jeopardize what's left of our fiscal system, but, good or bad, the 
whole world depends on our system.
  And I cannot believe that a group of Americans, especially Members of 
the Congress, would say that the President of the United States is not 
authorized to pay off the debts that we already had. We certainly can 
find a lot of agreement as to how we got there, whether it's President 
Obama or Bush's tax cuts, or going to wars that the Congress never 
declared, hey, all you need is a mathematician to add it up. But we got 
it there and we owe the money.
  Who is so less patriotic, who cares so little about our country that 
you would have, in addition to the falsehoods they tell about us, 
saying and we don't pay our debts either?
  It's a question that you want to talk about what we do in the future 
as relates to spending, but I know the debate has to deal with people 
who don't pay taxes. I know the debate has to say that people are 
taking unfair advantage of a Tax Code with so many loopholes in it that 
the most conservative Republican has to agree it's time for a reform.
  There's a broad area that we can talk about in what we're going to do 
about wild, reckless spending. But you just don't to it by saying that 
I am so angry with the President, I'm so politically involved in 
opposing him that I would deny him the opportunity to do what every 
President has always done, and that is to be able to tell the world 
that can you count on us to pay the money that we have borrowed.
  Now, being a politician myself, I know there's extreme things that we 
go through, but love of our country has to be something that we believe 
in. And I don't know what Republicans feel such a strong commitment to 
the Tea Party, or whatever other people having parties on the other 
side, that they would say that they will stop America from paying its 
debts.
  I don't believe it. You don't believe it. You know this is not going 
to pass. But my God, I don't think we should be dictated in connection 
with what foreigners think about us. There should be some dignity and 
pride in saying if we make mistakes, they are our mistakes. Not 
European mistakes, not foreign mistakes. And if we borrow money and we 
don't like how much we borrow, that is our domestic problem.
  For God's sake, don't let us fall in such partisan positions that we 
are going to say that the United States of America, the leader of the 
free world, we know how to borrow but we won't allow us to pay it back.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Rooney).
  Mr. ROONEY. Our national debt now stands at more than $15.2 trillion. 
That amount exceeds the entire U.S. economy. Washington's reckless 
spending now burdens every child born in the U.S. with a $50,000 share 
of the national debt. If we don't do something about it now, we will be 
the first generation in American history to leave our children a nation 
worse than we inherited.
  Our skyrocketing debt doesn't just affect our children and their 
future. It damages our economy and our unemployment rate today. It is a 
drag on the economy that fuels uncertainty. It hurts our credit rating. 
It slows economic growth and it prevents job creation.
  When President Obama took office, he pledged to cut the deficit in 
half by 2012. After 3 years in office, has he yet to introduce a 
credible plan to get our deficits under control? No. Instead, under his 
watch the country has hit three of the highest deficits on record. That 
is unacceptable. The national debt has grown by more than 4.6 trillion 
in his 3 years in office.
  We can't solve our debt problems until we address the root cause of 
this issue, and that is overspending here in Washington, D.C.
  In the House, we passed a budget that would put our country on the 
path to a balanced budget. The Senate didn't pass a budget, they didn't 
take up our budget. They did nothing.
  We passed nearly 1 trillion in spending cuts and we are planning to 
do more this year. The Senate, as I said, has not written a budget in 
nearly 1,000 days.
  If your family was trying to get out of the red, you would sit down 
at the table, figure out how much you're making, how much you're 
spending and where you should cut back. The Senate refuses to do that. 
Think about that for

[[Page 87]]

a second. How on earth are we supposed to get our fiscal house in order 
if the Senate won't even write a budget?
  Why won't the Senate do their job? One word: Politics. It is no 
wonder we have a 12 percent approval rating.
  It is time to cut up the credit cards here in Washington and stop 
spending money we don't have. The longer we wait, the harder it will be 
to fix the mess that we are in. Putting our country on a responsible 
fiscal path is the only way to restart the economy and ensure our 
children a prosperous future.
  Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, it is my privilege to yield 3 minutes to 
another distinguished member of our committee, the gentleman from the 
State of New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell).
  Mr. PASCRELL. I thank the gentleman from Michigan.
  Listening to this debate, you're not hearing the same thing you heard 
7 months ago I'm told. But when you look away, then you say: Gee, 
didn't I hear this before. Maybe that is true on both sides.
  Bruce Bartlett, who was a former adviser to President Reagan and a 
Treasury official in George Bush's administration, wrote about the five 
myths of not paying the debt or not increasing the debt. One of them I 
think bears witness today of what I have heard, the myth that it is 
worth risking default on the debt to prevent a tax increase given the 
weak economy. This is a Republican saying this. I'm just repeating the 
words.
  He says while Republicans' concerns about higher taxes are not 
unreasonable--and they are not--most economists believe that any fiscal 
contraction at this time would be dangerous. In fact, they note that a 
large cut in spending in 1937 brought in another sharp recession.

                              {time}  1440

  It's very easy to say that the President is the reason why we had the 
plague and the tremendous deficit, but if the private sector wasn't 
spending money, then we would have had 5 million more people out of 
work.
  The government has a responsibility when folks can't do for 
themselves what we expect. That undermines the recovery of the country, 
and that's what happened in the Great Depression. Republicans respond 
that tax increases are especially harmful to growth; however, they made 
the same argument in 1982 when President Reagan requested the largest 
peacetime tax increase in American history, and again in 1993 when 
President Bill Clinton asked for a large tax boost for deficit 
reduction. In both cases, conservative economists' predictions of 
economic disaster were completely wrong and strong economic growth 
followed.
  I wasn't here in '93. Many of you were here in '93. You remember what 
the dire consequences of the Clinton plan were and what happened. We 
had the greatest boom in 50 years. Just like the economists who told us 
we were heading toward nirvana since 2001; and I don't want any part of 
nirvana if that's it, and none of us do.
  We're not talking here about helping the middle class; that's for 
sure. We've got bailouts for them, for the other side. We know what the 
results are. All of us know that. It's not a partisan issue, really.
  So you're trying to say that you want to protect people's taxes, and 
we want to say we've got to pay our debts. Well, we're really not 180 
degrees apart. I think we need to do both. And if we don't sit down 
together, we're not going to do both.
  Mr. REED. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. 
Manzullo).
  Mr. MANZULLO. Madam Speaker, any vote to raise the debt ceiling 
should be tied to restraints on spending.
  This is the voting card, America's most expensive credit card. During 
my time in Congress, I voted nine times against raising the debt limit 
because it was not tied to spending controls. This is another time to 
say ``no.''
  Last August we were hopeful that we could have gone beyond the $4 
trillion mandate in the Budget Control Act, but it did not happen. 
Unfortunately, the supercommittee could not come to a consensus, and 
we've been drifting ever since. We are now projected to add $2.1 
trillion to the national debt since August, with the President's most 
recent request.
  I've voted over 700 times against 2.6 trillion in spending over the 
past 5 years. That's a good place to start to find the savings that we 
need to get serious on debt reduction.
  We need to vote ``yes'' to disapprove raising the debt limit yet 
again so we can get to work to cut the spending.
  Mr. LEVIN. You know, I was looking over the vote from the 1st of 
August, and it's interesting to see and hear people coming forth who 
voted ``aye'' on August 1 and now essentially want to repudiate that.
  I now yield 3 minutes to another very distinguished active member of 
our committee, James McDermott, Dr. McDermott, from the snowy State of 
Washington.
  Mr. McDERMOTT. Madam Speaker, it's been more than a year since the 
Tea Party took over the House, 375 days, and in all of that time, the 
Republicans have not brought one bill to the floor to help the 
economy--not a single bill.
  Today, after a long vacation and on the only day of legislative 
business in the month of January, the Republicans are yet again wasting 
the American people's time putting out press releases. We aren't voting 
to help Americans get jobs or make education better or investing in 
roads or bridges, no. Instead, the Republicans have us voting on their 
top priority: to default on our country's debts. Ain't that some 
priority?
  Today's vote is exactly why the public is disgusted with the 
Congress. The hypocrisy of this vote boggles your mind. Republicans 
wage unnecessary wars on our credit cards, they cut taxes on the very 
rich and blow up the deficit, and now they don't want to pay for the 
spending binge.
  Yesterday, I got the Republican Study Committee's email outlining 
their agenda for next year. I admit I subscribe. I always want to know 
what folks on the other side of the aisle have come up with.
  We have 14 million people unemployed. We have huge competitive 
challenges with other countries. There's lots of investing that we need 
to do at home. But what's the Republican program as they put it out 
over the email? Nothing. They didn't have one new idea in that agenda. 
All the Republicans want is more war, more deregulation on Wall Street, 
and more dirty air--and no help of any kind whatsoever for the middle 
class.
  Madam Speaker, the Republicans are wasting the Americans' time. We 
need investment, not a Republican default. They're spending their time 
in South Carolina now selecting their next leader to lead into this 
same Congress of ``no.'' This is the Congress of ``no'' we're watching. 
They don't pay their debts. They don't have any ideas. They don't 
provide any jobs. It is simply the ``no'' Congress.
  Mr. REED. I'd just like to remind my colleagues on the other side of 
the aisle that last time we took a vote on this issue back on the 
Budget Control Act in August was a much different time than today. 
Since August, we've been waiting for a plan from the other side to deal 
with our national debt. We've been waiting for a plan from the White 
House to deal with our national debt. Nothing has occurred.
  So, Madam Speaker, there is no repudiation of our vote from August. 
This is consistent with what the American people are telling us, that 
we have to get our act together in Washington.
  I join my colleagues on the other side. My hand is open to work hand 
in hand to deal with these problems once and for all. I'm willing to 
sacrifice my political life to do what needs to be done for the 
American people. I just hope my friends and colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle will join in that same sentiment.
  Let's put politics aside. Let's deal with the substance of the day. 
Let's deal with this underlying national crisis that is represented in 
our national debt. You have many friends over here that are looking to 
reach out hand to hand, join arm in arm to deal with this

[[Page 88]]

problem and deal with the economy of our Nation once and for all. I 
just ask you to jump and join us rather than fight us.
  With that, I'm happy to yield to my colleague from Arizona (Mr. 
Flake) for 2 minutes.
  Mr. FLAKE. This vote has been called a charade. That is true; it is. 
Let's face it. The President will veto this. The Senate will sustain 
the veto.
  Having said that, for years and years we raised the debt limit 
without a discussion, let alone a vote sometimes. It would just happen 
procedurally. That's wrong. At least this time we've had a discussion 
back in August. I didn't favor the budget agreement that we had there. 
I did not vote for it because I think, if we're going to raise the debt 
ceiling, then boy, we ought to have a plan to pay down the debt or 
actually deal with the deficit.
  But I think we have to admit that even if the Senate had passed the 
House-passed budget, the so-called Ryan budget, we would still have to 
raise the debt ceiling. I don't think anybody really disputes that. 
We're going to have to raise the debt ceiling again and again. But at 
least let's put together a plan to deal with our deficit, and we 
haven't done that.
  Now, in our candid moments over here on the Republican side of the 
aisle, we have to admit that we were headed toward this fiscal cliff 
long before the current President took the wheel. He stepped on the 
accelerator a bit, and we're going to get there a lot faster.
  Having said that, this Congress seems to only take action when we're 
right at that cliff, right staring off into the abyss. We can't do that 
anymore. We don't know where that next cliff is. It could happen when 
we have a treasury auction and have no buyers for our debt. That could 
happen sooner than we might want to realize. So it behooves us now to 
actually put together a plan to deal with our debt and deficit. That 
plan does not exist today.

                              {time}  1450

  So I think, for that reason, we ought to vote for this resolution and 
then actually put a plan in place to deal with it rather than just 
letting future generations inherit this debt.
  Mr. LEVIN. I yield myself 15 seconds.
  Mr. Flake, the problem is, if you prevailed, you'd create an abyss.
  Madam Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to the very distinguished 
gentleman from Georgia, another active member of our committee, Mr. 
Lewis.
  Mr. LEWIS of Georgia. I want to thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Here we go again, Madam Speaker. Instead of working on legislation to 
help create jobs, House Republicans have gathered us here for political 
games. This bill is not constructive. Madam Speaker, it is destructive. 
It is disruptive to the most important task we face--helping struggling 
Americans get back to work and getting our economy moving again.
  We've been down this road before. We fought this so-called ``battle'' 
last year. The debt limit is America's credit card bill, and just 
because we don't like the balance doesn't mean we don't have to pay it. 
It's just that simple. When you get a balance on your credit card, you 
pay it. We all do it. This exercise is a waste of time and taxpayer 
dollars.
  I urge all of my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this bill. Let's come 
together and work for the good of this Nation and not partisan dissent. 
The time is always right to do right.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I would just like to remind my colleague on 
the other side of the aisle that when you get a credit card bill that 
you can no longer afford, you do pay it, but you cut it up, and you 
stop the spending so you don't exacerbate the problem.
  With that, I would like to yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
  Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
yielding, and I stand in strong support of this resolution of 
disapproval of increasing the debt ceiling another $1.2 trillion.
  You've heard colleagues on both sides of the aisle, members of the 
Ways and Means Committee, the distinguished former chairman, Mr. 
Rangel, and others speak about why we have to raise the debt ceiling 
and that it's something that has been done over the years. Certainly, 
that's true. In the 9 years that I've been a Member--this being my 10th 
year--I've seen it happen many times. A lot of times it has passed, as 
Mr. Flake said, procedurally, and the public doesn't even know it.
  Now, I rarely disagree with my friend from Arizona, but I take a 
little bit of exception to what he said. He said the President has just 
stepped on the accelerator a bit. I would say $4.5 trillion in 3\1/2\ 
years is not stepping on the accelerator just a bit, Madam Speaker; 
that's putting the pedal to the metal. This has gotten so totally out 
of hand that it has got to stop.
  So, on our side, this is not a waste of time as the gentleman from 
Washington said. We're not just pandering to the Tea Party. Listen, 
we're paying attention to the conservatives in this country, who first 
got my attention in 1964, and to the conscience of a conservative: to 
just quit all this spending and get our fiscal house in order. We need 
to do that with the cooperation on both sides of the aisle.
  This resolution of disapproval, yes, it's going to fail--we 
understand that--but the American people need to know that there are 
Members of this Congress who are going to stand with them. Whether you 
call them Tea Party or whatever and try to denigrate them, we're going 
to stand with them and do the right thing. That's why I'm proud to take 
the time today. Yes, it is important. It may be the most important 
thing we do to finally say that we're not going to overspend; and then 
we say we're going to cut over the next 10 years but we'll borrow over 
the next year $1.2 trillion. It has got to end.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. REED. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.
  Mr. GINGREY of Georgia. My colleague has yielded to me a little bit 
of additional time, but I'm pretty much ready to wrap up, Madam 
Speaker.
  Honestly, this is what we need to do. This is what the American 
public wants us to do. It's time for us to get together in a bipartisan 
way to solve this, to solve Medicare, to solve Social Security.
  As former Speaker Newt Gingrich said on the campaign trail just 
yesterday: It's time to take Social Security off budget and have it 
stand alone, not let the Congress raid the trust fund. We now owe it 
$2.5 trillion. Then for the Secretary of the Treasury to say if we 
don't increase the debt ceiling that seniors are not going to get their 
Social Security checks, that's baloney.
  Mr. LEVIN. It is now my privilege to yield 3 minutes to another 
distinguished member of our committee, the gentleman from Massachusetts 
(Mr. Neal).
  Mr. NEAL. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Let me call attention to some of the statements that have been 
offered here.
  Mr. Reed, the reason you were invited to the floor to manage this 
time as a freshman Member of Congress is very simple. You weren't here 
for the reckless ride that the Republican Party took during the 8 years 
of the Bush administration. That's why you're here and the other 
freshmen who have come to the floor. You weren't here for this tirade 
of spending.
  You said you'd cut up the credit card. So we're going to cut up the 
credit card for the VA hospitals after 35,000 men and women have been 
wounded serving us honorably in Iraq and Afghanistan?
  Now, look. I voted against the war in Iraq, and I voted against the 
Bush tax cuts in 2001 and 2003. Now a fact, not opinion: Bill Clinton 
says goodbye, and there is a $5.7 trillion surplus. He balanced budgets 
four times in 5 years. It has only happened five times since the end of 
World War II.
  The gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake) is one of the few Republicans 
who will come to the House with a straight face and say, Let me tell 
you how we got here. He knows how we got here. Mr. Gingrey is a friend, 
and he knows how we got here. You can't cut taxes by $2.3 trillion and 
fight two wars and honor the commitment we have to

[[Page 89]]

those men and women who have served us honorably in Iraq and 
Afghanistan. While I was against the tax cuts and while I was against 
the war in Iraq, I'm going to vote for those appropriations to take 
care of those veterans' hospitals. You don't cut up the credit card 
when they come back. You use good judgment before you send them off.
  What happened here during those 8 years with the prescription drug 
benefit? What happened during those 8 years with weapons of mass 
destruction? What happened with tax cuts? By the way, the corresponding 
argument on those tax cuts is: Tax cuts pay for themselves? Well, guess 
what. We're staring at a $15 trillion deficit and debt because of those 
reckless fiscal practices that took place.
  For the Republican Party to make these arguments today about this 
issue--which, by the way, Mr. Flake is correct about again--is but a 
charade. You meet your obligations. You pay your bills. That's what the 
credit card is about and not to pontificate in front of this Chamber 
today about reckless spending when, for 8 years, nobody had the courage 
on that side to stand up and say enough is enough.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from Tennessee (Mrs. Blackburn).
  Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman for the time.
  Every time I go back home to Tennessee and as I hold town hall 
meetings, I do hear from my constituents: Enough is enough. Stop the 
madness. Let's get the Nation's fiscal house in order.
  That is what the American people are demanding that we do. Just so we 
all realize what the debt is, you're talking $15.2 trillion. Nearly $5 
trillion, or one-third, of that debt has come onto the books in the 
past 3\1/2\ years. That is the rate of acceleration by which this 
administration is pushing this Nation to the brink, and that is why our 
constituents are saying, ``Stop it.'' It's the reason for this vote 
today: to pass a resolution of disapproval and to send our message to 
the President that, look, time has long passed for you to bring forward 
a plan to deal with this debt. It is your responsibility to do so for 
this country, and it is your responsibility to do so for future 
generations in order to make certain that our children and our 
grandchildren, like my two grandchildren, don't have an increasing 
share of this.

                              {time}  1500

  This past year, a family's share of our national debt grew by 
$30,000. It is time for us to realize that we have to stop the out-of-
control spending, we have to freeze this spending, and then we have to 
begin to cut and remove and eliminate items that are unnecessary to the 
budget. Let's reiterate our commitment to getting back on the right 
track, getting our fiscal house in order, and let's reiterate this 
commitment to the American people that we have hit the high-water mark 
in spending, and we are going to join together in a bipartisan fashion 
to make certain that we get the Federal Government's fiscal house in 
order.
  Mr. LEVIN. I yield 3 minutes to another distinguished member of our 
committee, the gentleman from the great State of Oregon (Mr. 
Blumenauer).
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. I appreciate the gentleman's courtesy in permitting 
me to speak on this measure. What we are dealing with today is a 
smokescreen to obscure the self-inflicted crisis of confidence that has 
been unfolding with our friends on the other side of the aisle over the 
course of this last year.
  Everybody knew that we would honor our debts that had already been 
incurred, but they fogged the issue, created doubt, pushed to the 
brink. And this charade today is a result of what was required to help 
them get off the ledge onto which they had climbed, that risk, damaging 
the credibility and creditworthiness of the United States.
  The issue should be how we spend money. We need to change how we do 
business, and I think, with all due respect, there are things that we 
could be working on now to make some progress.
  There is an opportunity to reform our tax system that is complex and 
unfair. We're just finding out that Mr. Romney, worth hundreds of 
millions of dollars, pays less in tax than probably the undocumented 
workers who worked in his yard.
  There are opportunities to deal with carried interest, with 
unnecessary tax breaks that are permanent for oil and gas while 
important emerging technologies like wind are in a state of limbo. And 
the public agrees that the most fortunate among us should be paying a 
little more. It's only fair, they can do it, it makes a difference.
  We could be working together on agricultural reform to spend less 
money, but target on farmers and ranchers, rather than large 
agribusiness.
  We should accelerate the health care reforms that started out 
bipartisan and relatively noncontroversial that actually would help us 
no longer spend twice as much as other developed countries for results 
that aren't as good.
  Instead of getting down to brass tacks, my Republican friends are 
playing games like this measure. Luckily the game that they are playing 
today won't crash the global economy, but it will further erode 
confidence in Congress, and it delays the day that we work together on 
the elements that I just described where we could get bipartisan 
support, change how we do business, reduce the deficit, and give the 
taxpayers more value for their dollars.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).
  Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman from New York for yielding.
  Let's look at President Obama's record after his first 3 years. 
President Obama has left us a record of debt, despair, and downgrades, 
and here we are today debating whether or not President Obama is able 
to go grab another $1.2 trillion that he adds to the debt of our Nation 
that our children and grandchildren are going to have to pay.
  The reason we were downgraded is because President Obama himself has 
still refused to put a plan forward to balance the Federal budget, his 
budget that he purported and pushed forth doubles the national debt in 
his first 5 years. And then, of course, he becomes the first President 
in the history of our Nation to have our debt rating, the debt rating 
of the United States, downgraded.
  You know, you look at the despair as Americans are trying to get 
jobs. We're getting reports today that President Obama is going to 
reject the Keystone pipeline, turning his back on 20,000 American 
families who were looking for those good jobs here in America, making 
us more dependent on Middle Eastern countries who don't like us.
  You know, the Canadians, who are a good friend of ours, wanted to 
send oil down to America. That's oil we don't have to be buying from 
Middle Eastern countries. Instead, the President is going to, as we're 
hearing reports of today, is going to turn his back on those 20,000 
jobs. And he's going to send that oil and those jobs to China.
  Now how preposterous is that? As the President is trying to rack up 
more debt on the Nation's credit card, which we're debating here today, 
at the same time he's turning his back and running 20,000 more jobs out 
of this country. That's the record of this administration. That's what 
President Obama has given us, and you wonder why we've had over 8 
percent unemployment for almost every single month he's been President.
  We can't afford the Obama economy. It's time for a change. We need to 
reject this increase in the debt ceiling. Stop spending money that we 
don't have.
  Mr. LEVIN. I yield 3 minutes to a former active member of our 
committee, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Yarmuth).
  Mr. YARMUTH. I thank my good friend.
  Madam Speaker, I understand the Republican majority will vote today 
against the President's request to raise the debt limit. To borrow a 
phrase from the former Speaker of the House, can we please drop the 
pious baloney?
  Less than 6 months ago, 174 Republicans voted for precisely what they 
are voting against today. This Republican

[[Page 90]]

leadership created a national crisis and walked us to the brink of 
default. Then they voted for a bill to end the crisis, but slipped in a 
provision allowing them to attack the President for the decision that 
they now don't have the guts to stand by.
  This is not leadership, and it certainly is not governing. It's an 
ideological game that has ventured well beyond the absurd.
  Now, Mr. Flake, I think in a very important moment of candor, talked 
about the fact that the very budget that the Republicans passed this 
last year would, in fact, raise the national debt by more than $6 
trillion over the next 10 years. You cannot square logically an 
opposition to raising the debt ceiling when you have then voted for a 
budget that does exactly that. It raises the national debt.
  And with all due respect to the gentleman from New York, when he says 
nothing's changed in the last 7 months--nothing has changed in the last 
7 months. We agreed on something, we knew what the debt was going to 
be, the deficit. We agreed to accommodate it in this way.
  The only thing that has changed in the last 7 months is that the 
Republicans are now trying to renege on the agreement that they made 7 
months ago. That's the only thing that's changed.
  The American people have been loud and clear on what they need from 
this Congress: responsible investments and infrastructure; education; 
and job creation. And they want everyone to share in the sacrifice for 
our economic recovery, including billionaires and big oil companies.
  Madam Speaker, it's time to do the work the American people have 
asked us to do. They don't have time for more pious baloney.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I would just remind the gentleman that what 
we have done on our side of the aisle is at least we have put a plan in 
writing by adopting and approving the budget. We're just looking. In 
the last 7 months we've been waiting for a plan in black and white from 
the White House on how we are going to get out of this national debt 
crisis. Not political speeches, but in black and white so that we can 
take it back to the American people and have an open and honest debate 
with them as to where we're going to prioritize our spending and how 
we're going to get out of this hole.
  That's what we're looking for, and that's what my colleague from 
Arizona (Mr. Flake) is talking about. We are at the point on this side 
of the aisle, ladies and gentlemen, of saying we don't care who's at 
fault. I'm at the point--Democrat, Republican, we're at $15.2 trillion, 
whoever is responsible for it, I could care less.

                              {time}  1510

  What I care about are my kids--and my grandkids, who aren't even 
born, who aren't even on the face of this Earth--and getting our act 
together in Washington and getting a national plan put together so we 
can join arm in arm and stand with each other to deal with this issue.
  With that, Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Kansas (Mr. Huelskamp).
  Mr. HUELSKAMP. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition to raising 
the debt limit again and again and again.
  Last week, I traveled across the First Congressional District of 
Kansas to host seven town hall meetings. Kansans reiterated the same 
thing I heard in 70 town halls last year--overspending, over-
regulation, and yes, overtaxing must end now.
  Kansans are not concerned about the next election, like most in 
Washington seem to be. They are worried about the next generation.
  Between the first day this President took office and today, debt has 
grown by $4.6 trillion. As a comparison, it took from George Washington 
to Bill Clinton to build up that much debt. And now the President wants 
another $1.2 trillion. But unfortunately, the real battle to prohibit 
this $1.2 trillion mortgage on our children's future was lost 5 months 
ago when the House passed the Budget Control Act. Since the Budget 
Control Act passed, the Congress has failed to produce any cuts from 
the supercommittee. We have failed to pass a balanced budget amendment. 
And Senator Reid not only refuses to pass but even to consider a 
budget.
  However, those recent failures don't paint the picture. The culture 
of overspending in Washington for the past half century has led us to 
where we are today. Every President has refused to balance the budget. 
Every Member of Congress who advocated for their pet projects, every 
bureaucrat who practiced a use-it-or-lose-it mentality, every special 
interest who came to us, everyone, they are all to blame for where we 
stand today.
  Our national debt is equal to our GDP. When this debt limit is 
reached, every man, woman, and child in America will have their own 
debt to pay to Washington of $50,000, and this doesn't take into 
account the mountains of debt we face for future runaway entitlement 
programs.
  I look around this body, this is not about us. This is about our 
children and grandchildren who will have to pay this back. Unless and 
until Washington can get its grip on reckless spending and borrowing, 
the future of our country will remain on the line.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will advise the gentleman from New 
York that he has 34 minutes remaining on his side. The gentleman from 
Michigan has 35\1/2\ minutes.
  Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, it is now my privilege to yield 5 minutes 
to our distinguished whip, Mr. Hoyer from the great State of Maryland.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, according to a new poll by The Washington Post and ABC 
News, 84 percent of Americans disapprove of the way Congress is doing 
its job. I don't know that the other 16 percent are paying attention, 
because we're not doing our job well. And this certainly is not doing 
our job well. The reason it is not doing our job well is because it is 
a pretense, a sham. This legislation is to pay bills that we've already 
incurred. Whether, as the gentleman said, it was incurred with your 
votes or whether it was incurred with our votes, we have incurred those 
expenses. This is about whether America is going to pay its bills. 
Nothing more, nothing less.
  Now, the previous gentleman said nobody had done anything about the 
debt. In point of fact, we did do something about the debt. We put 
revenue at levels commensurate with our spending. As a result, in 1997, 
1998, 1999, and 2000 and 2001--in 1997 we brought the deficit down to 
$25 billion, and for the next 4 years, we had a surplus. Now a couple 
of those years were not real surpluses because we counted on Social 
Security revenue. But two of those years were real surpluses.
  This is about whether we pay our bills that we have incurred. Not 
doing this would be irresponsible, and would lead, I think, to further 
disrespect by the public, and properly so. One of the reasons for this 
feeling by the public is that Americans are tired of political games. 
This is a political game. This is a game that will say, see, I voted 
against debt.
  Now, let me tell you how you can vote against debt. When you cut 
taxes in 2001 and 2003--and I agree with my friend, it's not about 
blame. It is about learning, however. When we cut taxes in 2001 and 
2003 under George Bush, we didn't pay for them. We pretended they would 
pay for themselves. They didn't. Alan Greenspan says they won't. We 
ought to learn from that.
  Learning from that, we ought to say yes, we'll pay our debts. The 
President doesn't want this money. It's not for the President; it's for 
bills that we incurred in fighting two wars, in giving tax cuts 
primarily to the wealthiest in America, to passing a prescription drug 
program that frankly all of us now support, but we didn't pay for it. 
And as a result, we got deeply into debt. And we have to get out of 
that debt, and we have to show courage, wisdom, and hopefully 
intellectual honesty in getting to that.
  The American public is tired of seeing Republicans spending time on 
votes simply because of electoral positioning. And, frankly, they'd be 
tired of us doing the same thing. But that's all this is. It's so we 
can say: Look

[[Page 91]]

what we voted for. This is not our debt, we voted against it. But 
that's not responsible, and it's not honest. And I think most of you 
know that.
  The resolution before us today is simply another waste of time. More 
than that, it undermines confidence here and around the world. Some of 
that debt, of course, we owe to people around the world. It is the 
essence of political gamesmanship, and does nothing to reduce the debt 
or create jobs. And we spend a whole day on it. As a matter of fact, 
this is the only full day we are going to spend in January debating any 
issue.
  Americans know that we ought to pay our bills. They know we reached a 
deal in August that said both parties will work together to address our 
deficits in a way that will provide certainty to our businesses, 
markets, and families around the dinner table.
  Agreeing to this resolution would only provide more uncertainty at a 
time when our people need to see us working together on a big, balanced 
deal to meet our fiscal challenges. My friend and I are both for that 
effort. I am very much for that effort. But I don't pretend that not 
paying the bills that we have incurred is going to solve that problem. 
The only thing that's going to solve that problem is we're going to ask 
everybody to contribute their fair share. Yes, we're going to have to 
make some cuts. And we're going to have to make some cuts that neither 
side will like, and we're going to have to raise revenues that neither 
side will like.
  But I will tell my friend who is waiting for his grandchildren, I 
have three grandchildren now, and I have two great grandchildren, and 
he's right; they are the ones who are going to have to pay this bill.
  And I saw my young friend, a new Member from South Carolina, and I 
can't recall his name right this second.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LEVIN. I yield the gentleman an additional 3 minutes.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I saw my young friend passionate about not passing these bills along 
to his children. I thought to myself, I could give that speech. But, 
very frankly, I voted against cutting taxes without paying for them. I 
voted against the AMT without paying for it. We paid for it when we set 
the AMT. I think it needs to be fixed, and we paid for it.
  I will vote ``no'' on this resolution, which comes as no surprise 
after you've heard me talk, and I strongly encourage my colleagues to 
do the same. Why? America is disheartened because they do not believe 
we are honest in dealing with them. They believe we play political 
games. They believe that we are not addressing the issues they know are 
of importance and they know do not have easy, simplistic answers.
  I hope Democrats who vote ``no'' are joined by a large number of 
Republicans, not because you like debt, not because any of us like 
debt. And, very frankly, I voted for the Clinton revenue increases in 
1993, and the prediction on your side of the aisle was that it would 
destroy the economy, unemployment would spike, and the deficit would 
explode. None of that happened. You were wrong. All of us are wrong 
from time to time. Dead wrong.

                              {time}  1520

  As a matter of fact, we enjoyed the best economy I have seen in my 
adult life in the 1990s. And we have seen the worst recession in my 
life after pursuing the Bush policies for 8 years. Yes, we were in 
charge for the last 2, but we couldn't change policies because the 
President had the veto and a majority of the votes to sustain that veto 
on this floor.
  So ladies and gentlemen, let's be honest with the American people. 
We've all incurred a debt. We all spent the money. We drove on the 
roads, we were defended abroad, we invested in health care, research. 
We all incurred these debts. We know we need to solve it. We know that 
medicine will be tough. But honesty will make it easier, honesty 
between ourselves, honesty with the American people, and honesty, 
integrity and courage.
  I hear around this country talk about Greece has a real problem. They 
are 128 percent, I think, in debt; we're only at about 100 percent. If 
you count our internal debt, it's less than that. But the problem that 
Greece has is they don't have the resources to solve their problem. 
America, the good news for us is we have the resources to solve our 
problems if we have the courage and political will to do so. This vote 
is a small token of showing that we have the courage, the wisdom and 
the political will to do so.
  We need to pay our bills. Vote ``no'' on this resolution. Show the 
American people that we have courage, that we have wisdom, and we can 
have the political will to make America the continuing strongest 
country on the face of the Earth.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I would like to say to Mr. Hoyer that I have 
a tremendous amount of respect for him as a Member of this body. And I 
have joined him to support the ``Go Big'' effort.
  And what I would say is, by this resolution, look at what we have 
done on our side of the aisle. We have brought this conversation out of 
the back rooms. We have brought the ideas and proposals that we've 
heard from Mr. Blumenauer from Oregon, I believe, who talked about 
comprehensive tax reform, agriculture reform on the floor of this 
House, in front of the American people, in an open and honest manner. 
And what we have done on our side of the aisle is to stress that these 
conversations will no longer happen behind closed doors, but they will 
happen on the floor of this Chamber. And I'm confident, I am confident 
that when we come together like we are, like the foundation that we are 
setting in our conversations, that we are going to solve this problem. 
But until that solution is enacted, I will get up every day as a Member 
of this House to champion the cause of getting the fiscal house of 
Washington, DC in order, to get our reckless spending under control, 
and get this economy going.
  Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. REED. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
  Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his comments. And I want to 
thank him for his participation in addressing this issue. And frankly, 
in my opinion, he was one of the 100 signatories that we had saying 
let's get a big deal, we have to get a handle on this debt. I want to 
thank him. But I want to assure him as well, I've been here just a 
little longer than he has, this debate has been going on for some 
period of time. This is not a new debate. With all due respect, it's 
been on this floor--I've been raising this issue for some 20 years, 
very frankly, others have as well on both sides of the aisle. The 
debate has been going on, but as I said, we need to summon the courage 
and political will to not just debate it, but to address it and address 
it effectively. And I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Mississippi (Mr. Palazzo).
  Mr. PALAZZO. I thank the gentleman for my time.
  It's a new year, and we have a new chance to tackle some real 
problems in this session of the 112th Congress, but real problems need 
real solutions. We saw what was possible when the House came together 
last year to pass conservative, job-creating bills and a plan to cut 
$6.2 trillion in government spending and reduce deficits by $4.2 
trillion over the next decade. We also saw how little got done when 
Democrats in the Senate and the Obama administration consistently 
ignored the wishes of the American people.
  This administration has said it will continue to wage its 2012 
campaign against this Congress. So instead of working with us and 
encouraging the Senate to consider the numerous jobs bills we have 
passed in the House, the President has chosen once again to try to 
divide us and the American people.
  Make no mistake, the issue of spending will be as important in this 
second session of Congress as it was in the first. It remains so 
because our economy has not stabilized. Government is

[[Page 92]]

still too large and too many people are still looking for work. Yes, 
the President inherited a bad economy, but his destructive policies 
have made it much worse.
  I support this resolution of disapproval of the President's debt 
limit increase because shouldering future generations with trillions of 
dollars in debt is not leading, it is following. So I say to the 
President and leaders in the Senate, if you're ready to work together 
on some very real solutions to real problems in 2012, so are we. We've 
been ready.
  America deserves and demands better than the short-term, drive-the-
car-off-the-cliff mentality and policies our President has given us 
over this past year. And we in the House will continue to bring forth 
real leadership and real solutions to the real problems facing us for 
this generation and for those to come.
  Before I yield, one of our colleagues mentioned something about the 
Path to Prosperity, the Republican budget. He said, yes, it does 
include running deficits and increasing the debt. But what he failed to 
mention was it would also repeal job-killing regulations, simplify the 
Tax Code, repeal the government takeover of health care, and address 
the number one driver of our deficit, and that's Medicare. We call that 
plan the Path to Prosperity. The President and Democrats' only 
alternative has been a path to despair.
  Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds.
  Mr. Reed, Mr. Hoyer mentioned this. You know, on Ways and Means for 
years, once the Republicans gained the majority, we protested they 
weren't paying for anything. So this isn't a new issue. It isn't a new 
issue.
  I now yield 5 minutes to the ranking member of the Budget Committee 
and a distinguished former member of the Ways and Means Committee, the 
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank my colleague, Mr. Levin.
  You know, day after day, month after month, we hear Members of 
Congress--Republicans and Democrats alike--come to the floor of this 
House and say we've got to do more on jobs, we've got to make sure that 
we get this fragile economy moving again. Unfortunately, while we say 
those things in this body, we haven't yet taken up the President's jobs 
initiative that he presented to this Congress last September. We've 
taken little bits and pieces here and there. We've had 2 months now in 
the payroll tax cut--that's good news, I hope we can get the rest of 
it--but the rest of it has been absolutely ignored. But at least people 
said they wanted to focus on job creation and getting the economy 
moving again.
  And what's incredible about today is we have our Republican 
colleagues advocating a course of action which, if we took them 
seriously, would wreak absolute havoc on the economy. It would destroy 
jobs throughout the economy. That's not just me saying it, that's 
Republican economists, independent economists, Democratic economists. 
If the United States, for the first time in its history, refused to pay 
its debts, if the United States, for the first time in its history, 
refused to make good on the full faith and credit of the United States, 
the economy would fall to pieces, millions of people would lose their 
jobs.
  You know, if we want to be taken seriously we have to be serious 
about the consequences of our actions. And if we take the course of 
action being presented, we'd have a fiasco on our hands.
  Look, the American people I think understand full well what's going 
on here, but I do think it's important to make clear what the debt 
ceiling does. You raise the debt ceiling in order to cover obligations 
already made. If we don't lift the debt ceiling, it's as if we woke up 
one morning and said, you know, we're not going to pay our mortgage, or 
if you went out and purchased goods and services with a credit card and 
said, hey, you know what, we're not going to pay our credit card today. 
Well, you know what happens? You lose your house if you do that. The 
credit card company comes after you for that. If the United States of 
America was to renege on the full faith and credit of its obligations, 
it would be a disaster in the international economy, and yet that is 
apparently the course of action being advocated by our Republican 
colleagues today.

                              {time}  1530

  Now, what makes this really political theater is everybody knows that 
more responsible Members of Congress and certainly the President of the 
United States are not going to let that happen. They are not going to 
allow that reckless outcome to happen. And that's why, in so many ways, 
this is unfortunately just political theater; and it's one of the 
things, frankly, that contributes to the American people's low view of 
the Congress, this kind of political game playing.
  Another thing that contributes to that is Members of Congress' 
refusal to take responsibility for their own actions. Last year, we had 
the Republican budget on the floor of the House. There are major 
differences in the priorities between the Republican budgets and the 
Democratic budgets. But the reality is the Republican budget that was 
overwhelmingly voted for by our Republican colleagues would require us 
to lift the debt ceiling of the United States, the very debt ceiling 
that our Republican colleagues are now telling us they don't want to 
increase. It would require us. It would have added $7 trillion to the 
debt over the next 10 years.
  How is it that people can come down and vote for a budget that says 
we're going to ask the United States to take on these additional 
obligations and then vote for a motion, a resolution, that refuses to 
take responsibility for those very actions? And I think that's why the 
American people are understandably losing much of the confidence 
certainly in this House of Representatives.
  Obviously, we have big challenges with respect to the deficit. Let's 
get together and solve them. But as my colleague from Maryland (Mr. 
Hoyer) said, in order to do that, we have to come to the table in the 
spirit of compromise.
  And we have before the country a number of approaches. We've had a 
number of bipartisan commissions. We have Simpson-Bowles, Rivlin-
Domenici. They have established a framework for resolving the deficit 
issue. All of their frameworks say, yes, we have to make some tough 
decisions on making cuts, but we also have to deal with the revenue 
side of the equation. And the major obstacle--let's just be clear--to 
dealing with the revenue side of the equation is we have a lot of folks 
who have taken the position that you can't close one corporate tax 
loophole for the purpose of deficit reduction.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. LEVIN. I yield the gentleman from Maryland an additional 2 
minutes.
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. I thank my colleague from Michigan.
  We have our colleagues on the Republican side taking the position of 
the so-called Grover Norquist pledge, a pledge to Grover Norquist's 
organization as opposed to the pledge we all take to do our best to 
uphold the Constitution of the United States. And under that pledge, if 
you close a corporate tax loophole for the purpose of deficit 
reduction, you have violated your pledge. If you say, ``You know what? 
Gas prices are doing really well. Oil companies are doing just great. 
We don't think they need a taxpayer subsidy. We are going to get rid of 
it,'' you can't get rid of that if you are going to use some of that 
money for deficit reduction. It's a violation of the pledge.
  So, yes, let's get serious about deficit reduction. Let's take a 
balanced approach. We have a bipartisan model--at least a framework--in 
Simpson-Bowles. Let's be serious about that. But the reason this 
process on the floor of the House today is not serious is because 
everybody recognizes the United States can't afford to default on its 
full faith and credit--everybody, that is, except for the folks who are 
apparently going to vote to say we can't raise the debt ceiling, that 
we are not going to take responsibility for paying for obligations 
already due and owing, budgets

[[Page 93]]

already passed. What kind of message is that to our children?
  You've got to pay for your debts. But you know what? You don't really 
have to; wink, wink, nod, nod. Go ahead and buy those things on your 
credit card and then decide the next day you are not going to pay for 
them. What a terrible message that is.
  So let's take responsibility, I will say to our colleagues, for our 
actions. Let's not play political games. And most of all, let's not 
follow the advice that our Republican colleagues today are recommending 
which would undoubtedly, if taken seriously, result in economic chaos 
and a huge loss of jobs.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I'm happy to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Buerkle).
  Ms. BUERKLE. I thank my colleague from New York.
  You know, we prepare our remarks to come down here and speak, but as 
I listen to my colleagues across the aisle, I just have to comment on a 
couple of things here today. First and foremost, this is not a 
Democratic or a Republican issue. The debt that this Nation faces is 
not partisan. It's an American issue. We need to join together and 
figure out a path forward. And to hear my colleagues across the aisle 
demagogue our Republican budget--well, I challenge the Senate to put 
forth a budget, and let's put a spending plan in place.
  This debate about the debt ceiling is critical to this country 
because we can't get the Senate to the table to debate a budget, so 
we've got to somehow get their comments out and get to the American 
people how very important it is to stop the spending.
  The United States of America doesn't have a taxing problem; we have a 
spending problem. And until and unless we get our spending under 
control, we cannot move forward as a Nation. It isn't about taxing the 
American people anymore. They are taxed enough. We need a fairer and a 
flatter income tax. We need to revise our Tax Code. But, most 
importantly, we need to stop the spending.
  This past week, our President came out, Madam Speaker, and he talked 
to us about consolidating Departments within the Federal Government, 
about decreasing government, making it more efficient, and yet he comes 
to us and he asks us to increase the debt ceiling. That's talking out 
of both sides of your mouth, Madam Speaker. This President, I believe, 
thinks that government has the answers, and he wants to give the 
bureaucrats a blank check to move forward and to spend this country 
into oblivion.
  I came here as the mother of six children and a grandmother of 12 
because I believe the best thing we can do for this country is to get 
our spending under control, stop spending money that we don't have so 
that the country that we give to our kids and our grandchildren is a 
better place with more opportunity to achieve the American Dream.
  Mr. LEVIN. I now yield 3 minutes to the very active gentleman from 
Vermont (Mr. Welch).
  Mr. WELCH. I thank the gentleman.
  Madam Speaker, the course of action that is being proposed by the 
Republican majority is two things: One, it's reckless and 
irresponsible; and, two, it's cynical and very political.
  First of all, why is it reckless and irresponsible? It is because 
this country has never seriously considered defaulting on its 
obligations, saying ``no'' to paying its bills. What great country 
would ever seriously suggest to its citizens that it will stiff its 
creditors, with all of the economic chaos that would ensue?
  Also, the reason that we have to raise the debt ceiling is not so we 
have permission to spend more money. It's to meet obligations that have 
been incurred. Many of those obligations, incidentally, are for 
expenditures that I opposed but you supported: the war in Iraq; the 
extension of the Bush tax cuts; the Medicare prescription drug part D 
that was never paid for; the extension of the Bush tax cuts a year ago 
December when it was going to add $800 billion to the 10-year deficit, 
but even then, in order to accommodate that, you wouldn't raise the 
debt ceiling. So that's the irresponsible part of this proposal.
  Obligations incurred are obligations that must be paid. I was against 
the Iraq war. I didn't want to spend that money. Had I been here, I 
would have voted against the Bush tax cuts because I thought it was bad 
policy. But, as a Member of Congress, those were congressional 
obligations, I believe, that we and I have an obligation to stand 
behind.
  But secondly, the reason I believe this is cynical and political is 
two things: First, these budget requirements are ones that were 
incurred, in many cases, at the advocacy of our Republican majority. 
Secondly, this process that we're now doing is one that was designed to 
allow people who wanted to stand up and vote ``no'' against extending 
the debt ceiling the opportunity to do so so that they could claim they 
were against it, even though it was designed as well to guarantee that 
the debt ceiling would be raised, just putting the full burden of 
making that happen on the President of the United States.

                              {time}  1540

  I'm glad that he's willing to bear that responsibility. But I 
question whether the American people are fooled by a congressional 
maneuver whereby the majority is saying that we want to say no, that 
we're against raising the debt ceiling, even though we've guaranteed a 
process by which it will happen.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2\1/2\ minutes to the 
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. DesJarlais).
  Mr. DesJARLAIS. Madam Speaker, our Nation is over $15 trillion in 
debt. But what does 15 trillion in debt really mean?
  Well, it means that every American's share of the debt is roughly 
$48,000. It means that our debt is more than our Nation's yearly Gross 
Domestic Product. It means we must borrow 40 cents on every dollar we 
spend. And it means that China can purchase a new F-35 Joint Strike 
Fighter every 2 days with the interest we pay them.
  While these facts alone should cause concern, the truly frightening 
part is that there is no plan in place to prevent our debt from 
continuing to grow. Increasing the debt limit by another $1.2 trillion 
will mean by the end of 2012 our national debt will be in excess of $16 
trillion. But worse than that, raising the debt limit sends the message 
to job creators that we are still not serious about making the 
necessary spending cuts and reforms to pay down this unsustainable 
debt.
  My constituents have given me a clear message: Make the Federal 
Government live within its means. That will require us to prioritize 
our spending and make tough spending decisions. But there's no other 
choice. It is simply impossible to continue to run yearly trillion 
dollar deficits, yet that is exactly what some in Washington want to 
continue to do.
  There is absolutely no doubt that if we don't change this course, 
this reckless spending binge will ruin our economy and bankrupt our 
Nation. That is not fair to our future generations.
  We have an opportunity here today to say, enough is enough. We can be 
the Congress that acts to put this great Nation back on the right 
track.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of this 
disapproval resolution.
  Mr. LEVIN. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Ross).
  Mr. ROSS of Florida. I thank my colleague for yielding.
  Madam Speaker, today I rise against the debt ceiling, and I rise in 
favor of reality.
  Madam Speaker, my freshman colleagues and I arrived in Washington, 
D.C. from various backgrounds. Many, like me, owned their own 
businesses. Others include auto dealers, funeral home directors, a 
dentist, doctors, soldiers, a pilot, law enforcement officers, a 
football player, a roofing contractor and others. The point is, Madam 
Speaker, people who lived and worked in the real world came in as 
freshman as my colleagues.
  Many of that same group have been told, ``We just don't understand 
how

[[Page 94]]

Washington works.'' The fact is, Washington doesn't work. Only in 
Washington is slowing the rate of growth in spending called a cut. Only 
in Washington are job creators called a myth, but bailouts are called a 
stimulus.
  Madam Speaker, the sad reality is that Washington doesn't work. But 
what is more saddening is that it can. Our founders, in their enduring 
wisdom, crafted a system of government with checks and balances.
  Just because we have a President that is willing to spend our way 
into further debt does not mean that this branch of government has to 
go along with it. We have the ability, right here, right now, to stop 
repeating the fiscal insanity that has led us to trillions in debts and 
deficits.
  The fact that we're even talking about raising the debt limit without 
any realistic credible plan to pay off our debts shows just how 
ingrained in our thinking this irresponsible spending has become. The 
fact that this President wants to spend 23 to 25 percent of GDP, when 
over the last 80 years this government has never come close to matching 
that in revenues, regardless of tax rates, is a travesty to the 
American people, our children and our grandchildren.
  The fact that our friends across the Capitol can't pass a budget for 
more than 1,000 days is unacceptable. The fact that we are printing 
money to buy our own debt makes sense only if you got your economics 
degree by passing go and collecting $200.
  Madam Speaker, the entire government has a choice. We can make a 
government work for the betterment of the American people.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.
  Mr. REED. I yield an additional 1 minute to the gentleman from 
Florida.
  Mr. ROSS of Florida. We can make Washington work for the betterment 
of the American people. Will we live in the real world, prioritize 
spending and yes, go without, or will we continue to play in 
Congressional Candyland, the place where some say the sky is blue while 
others say the sky is red, and at the last minute, a deal is declared 
saying it's purple, and it's called progress.
  Madam Speaker, the sky is blue, and at this time, I ask Congress and 
the President to join the rest of America in the real world.
  Mr. LEVIN. How many more speakers do you have, Mr. Reed?
  Mr. REED. We believe we have about three or four.
  Mr. LEVIN. I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, could I inquire as to the amount of time we 
have left?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from New York has 23\1/2\ 
minutes remaining. The gentleman from Michigan has 17\1/4\.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield 3 minutes 
to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fitzpatrick).
  Mr. FITZPATRICK. I thank the gentleman.
  Madam Speaker, I rise today to state the obvious, that the Federal 
Government still spends too much and it borrows too much.
  President Obama has asked the Congress to raise the debt limit by 
$1.2 trillion. Let's put this number into perspective. There are 83 
million families in the United States. So what the President is really 
asking is for every hardworking American family to mortgage an 
additional $14,450. While middle-class Americans are struggling, the 
President has requested to pile more and more debt on top of 
hardworking taxpayers.
  Americans are tired of hoping that their lawmakers will come together 
and find commonsense solutions to a very serious problem facing our 
Nation. Our national debt stands at over $15 trillion. Our outstanding 
debt totals 100 percent of our Gross Domestic Product. Our credit 
rating has been downgraded. Medicare will be bankrupt in 9 years, and 
Social Security faces insolvency.
  The time for hope is past. We must act. America simply cannot wait. 
We got into this mess because of a decade of budget tricks, accounting 
gimmicks and empty promises. We did not get into this situation 
overnight, and we certainly cannot get out of it overnight.
  But the fact is, we need a commonsense budget and a Federal 
Government that is efficient and effective, not one that wastes money 
of hardworking taxpayers.
  If we do nothing, American prosperity will drown in debt, as we are 
currently on an unsustainable path of trillion per year deficits. But 
if we make the hard decisions today, we can avoid the unacceptable 
consequences that we will surely face.
  We're all in this together, and we must find a solution together. 
America never backs down from a challenge. We can and we will make the 
right decisions today so that we can restore the American dream and 
give our children and our grandchildren a future full of opportunity.
  Therefore, I support the resolution, and call on the President to 
work with the House and the Senate to put in place a budget that 
guarantees a more stable and secure future for America.
  Mr. LEVIN. Let me reserve so I don't have to do this each time until, 
Mr. Reed, you finish, and then I'll close and then you'll close.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kinzinger).
  Mr. KINZINGER. Madam Speaker, you know, I'm a military pilot, and 
I've been overseas and executed this Nation's wars. And I'll tell you, 
one of the things I've seen firsthand is that the biggest threat to our 
national security is our national debt.
  This debt ceiling increase is a symptom of overspending that has 
consumed Washington for far too long. President Obama's request for a 
$1.2 trillion increase in the debt limit points to the serious fiscal 
challenges we have found ourselves in due to decades of irresponsible 
and reckless spending.
  For decades, Members of Congress who continue to serve, voted to 
simply raise the debt ceiling without ever offering a plan to stop the 
bleeding. It wasn't until the new House majority arrived with my 
freshman class when we turned the focus of conversation from how much 
more to spend to how much we can cut, and we turned the conversation to 
how to cut spending in Washington, D.C. We demanded that Washington 
stop doing business as usual and include spending cuts greater than the 
amounts raised.

                              {time}  1550

  In June, I told President Obama head on in the weekly address that 
under no circumstances will Republicans support irresponsible 
legislation which increases the Federal Government's credit limit 
without any spending cuts or budgetary reforms.
  It's high time that we cut up the government's credit cards and draw 
a hard line to stop the government from overspending, which is 
hampering our economy's ability to grow and thrive.
  Currently, every man, woman, and child has a share of the public debt 
that exceeds $46,000 a piece. Unemployment rates are through the roof, 
and the irresponsible spending habits of prior Congresses and 
administrations have racked up trillions in national debt.
  The culture of Washington must be reformed from the ground up. The 
future of our Nation depends on it.
  Mr. LEVIN. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. REED. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada (Mr. 
Amodei).
  Mr. AMODEI. I want to thank my colleague from the Empire State.
  Recently a leader in the other House said, ``I hope this Congress has 
had a very good learning experience, especially those newer to this 
body.'' Essentially saying that you new people need to learn how we do 
things here in Washington.
  Well, as the newest Member of ``how we do things here in Washington'' 
for about 122 days, I can assure you that the people who gave me this 
job know how we do things here, and they're tired of it.
  They understand that Washington has a fatal spending problem. They 
understand that the answer to every question is not more Federal 
spending.

[[Page 95]]

That is the problem--more Federal spending. I find it interesting to 
hear my colleagues from both sides of the aisle talk about, we need to 
pay our bills. We need to talk about what we incur as bills before we 
take more money from others.
  This is not a problem that we got here by ourselves in a partisan 
manner. It was in fact a bipartisan problem. But to treat the solution 
as one that requires only a one-sided solution or another gets us to 
this point that I find it incredible that people would talk about 
wreaking havoc on the economy and also about sending the wrong message 
for confidence.
  For the first time in the history of this Nation, we've had our 
credit rating downgraded because of what we're doing here. This is not 
about whether we will pay our bills in the near future or not. This is 
about having the courage to start talking about how the problem is 
spending. Yes, there are loopholes, and yes there are others who may be 
able to pay more. But why on Earth would you ask them to pay more into 
this system of spending that we have created which is in no way 
accountable to any of those folks who are paying?
  So I can tell you this for those folks that are new and perhaps need 
to understand how things are done here in Washington: the people who 
gave me this job understand very well how things are done here in 
Washington, and they're tired of it. And you know what? They're right.
  Mr. LEVIN. I yield myself such time as I shall consume.
  It will take me just I think 30 seconds, maybe a minute.
  You know, in a few words what the Republicans in the House are doing, 
they're playing with fire. And that's reckless. They know that others 
will put out the fire. And we'll vote, many of us, to do that today. 
And if we don't succeed, the Senate will do so.
  This, I think, is worse than a charade because it really assumes that 
the agenda of this Congress should essentially be a kind of a 
plaything.
  A number of the people who came to speak for this resolution voted in 
August for the resolution that brings us here today, including, I 
think, Mr. Reed.
  So I think what's changed is not our responsibility, but the ability 
of some to kind of have it both ways, to vote ``yes'' on the resolution 
knowing that as it goes to the Senate, this potential damage to the 
economy will be saved.
  I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. REED. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  I thank my colleague on the other side of the aisle, Mr. Levin, for 
engaging in this debate today that is so important, in my opinion, to 
the future of this Nation, to the future of the world, in the sense 
that we need to get this issue under control once and for all.
  The national debt is a serious threat to our very existence as a 
nation. You don't have to take my word for it. You can take the word of 
the former joint chief of staff, Admiral Mullen, who, when he was asked 
by the President what is the biggest threat to our national security, 
responded: Not a military threat, but the national debt. A fiscal 
threat is what jeopardizes us most in regards to our national security.
  When I hear that type of opinion and advice coming out of our 
military leaders, I am very concerned. It should send a message across 
the nation that this debt needs to be addressed. It doesn't necessarily 
just need to be addressed for the purposes of the threat it represents 
to our national security, but also the threat that it represents to the 
economic recovery that we are trying to kindle in this city across 
America.
  The national debt represents a threat to that American recovery when 
it comes to putting our men and women back to work because it is the 
cancer that is causing concern across all of small-business America and 
all across the private sector when they express that they don't have 
the confidence or certainty that Washington will take care of the 
problems that threaten us most. So it is time that we come up with a 
hard plan.
  My colleagues during this debate referenced the House budget as the 
plan that was adopted here, that somehow by voting for this resolution 
we contradict ourselves because we voted for that House budget because 
it called for an increase in the debt ceiling. I would remind my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle, that budget only passed this 
House. The Senate has yet to enact a budget.
  It will soon be 1,000 days that the Senate of the United States of 
America has not passed a budget. If we don't have a U.S. House and a 
U.S. Senate committed budget that we can rely upon to solve this issue, 
how can we only rely on the House budget to see us through?
  This resolution today sends a message to the Senate and to the Nation 
that the House of Representatives will remain committed to finding a 
solution on this issue.
  The second threat that it represents to our American recovery and 
putting men and women back to work is if our interest rates in the 
private sector, which are keyed upon the national debt and the interest 
rates that are charged for our borrowing costs as a governmental 
entity, if those interest rates in the private sector increase, you're 
not going to have the capital to invest in small-business America or in 
the private sector that is going to lead us out of this economic 
turmoil that we find ourselves in, because they won't be able to afford 
that capital that will build the next plant, that will build the next 
assembly line or build the next retail operation that will put people 
back to work.
  The bottom line is this debt touches everything across America. What 
we are doing with this resolution is saying we are going to deal with 
it, and we are going to continue to deal with it until we get a plan in 
place from the White House, from the U.S. Senate, and from the U.S. 
House that deals with it once and for all and brings certainty and 
competence back to the American market.
  Madam Speaker, it is time to lead this Nation, not hide. It is time 
to put our ideas in writing, debate them with the American people in an 
open and honest fashion, and once and for all even be willing to 
sacrifice our political lives to do what is right for the American 
people. I am committed to doing that if it means that we will save my 
children's generation and the generations yet to come.

                              {time}  1600

  That's what needs to be done, and I think my colleagues on the other 
side of the aisle know that. We know it on our side of the aisle, and 
our hand is open to work in a bipartisan fashion. So I am glad that I 
heard many comments today on the other side of the aisle showing they 
are committed to that also. I am confident that when we join hands, 
when we come together, we will solve this issue and that we will solve 
the economic problems we face as a Nation, because together the history 
of our Nation has shown that we can overcome any obstacle in America, 
any threat to our existence once we unite, not divide, and put forth a 
commonsense solution to our problems.
  With that, Madam Speaker, I ask all of my colleagues to support this 
resolution, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. DINGELL. Madam Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.J. Res. 98, a 
resolution disapproving of President Obama's exercise of authority to 
increase the debt limit. We have been through this song and dance 
several times before, and we have reached the same conclusion every 
time. Failing to raise the debt ceiling would do irreparable damage to 
our economy, our financial markets and our credit rating. We know we 
must raise the debt ceiling to prevent a default on our nation's 
obligations, avert an international economic crisis, and prevent 
further harm from being visited upon middle class families. Why are 
some around here so hopelessly slow--or is it malevolent?
  With the coming of the new year, most of us hoped that Congress would 
reconvene with a real dedication to getting our economy on track and 
putting Americans back to work. Yet here we are, rehashing the same 
tired debate for the third time and continuing to play the same sorry 
old political blame games. It is no surprise that the approval ratings 
of this institution are at record lows when the American people see us 
engaged in political posturing

[[Page 96]]

instead of trying to deal with the problems average Americans face 
every day. People across this country are hurting and are sick of the 
inaction in Washington.
  Instead of passing a full-year extension of the payroll tax cut, 
reauthorizing our Nation's surface transportation programs or federal 
aviation programs, we are faced with another symbolic vote which has no 
chance of being signed into law. Why would leadership even schedule 
this vote? Is it to pander to their base and score cheap political 
points? Congress has plenty of items to consider which could provide a 
real benefit to the American people and our country. It is time to stop 
playing games and get to work, and we might just do something good for 
America.
  Mr. MACK. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution to stop 
the President from increasing Washington's borrowing authority once 
again. How many times do we have to say ``Enough is enough'' before 
President Obama and his liberal allies in Congress get the message?
  Do we have to be in a debt crisis like Europe's before we make the 
necessary spending cuts? Does our country's credit rating have to be 
downgraded further? Do we have to be pushed into a corner with no other 
option but to eliminate programs altogether before we do what's right 
for America's economic well-being? The answer is clearly ``no.'' We can 
act now to avoid more painful decisions down the road. America's 
freedom, security, and prosperity depend on our courage and what we do 
now to restore fiscal discipline.
  America can't afford to let this President continue to borrow and 
spend on our nation's credit card to advance his failed liberal 
policies. We need to adopt this resolution. And we need to enact the 
Penny Plan--legislation I introduced to cut spending by just one penny 
out of every federal dollar spent and to balance our nation's budget.
  Madam Speaker, if families and businesses throughout the United 
States have to make the tough decisions and cut their budgets so their 
families and businesses won't be buried in debt, why can't the 
government do the same for the American people? After all, tax dollars 
don't belong to the government--they belong to the people who work hard 
to pay their bills and make their payrolls. We, as elected officials, 
must be responsible stewards of the people's money. We have been 
entrusted by those who have put us here.
  If we allow Washington to continue its reckless spending habits, we 
will continue to lose the people's trust--and justifiably so. This is 
the ``People's House.'' If we don't stand for the American people, who 
do we stand for? Deficit spending must stop. Enough is enough. Let's 
restore the America we know and love by getting--and keeping--our 
fiscal house in order.
  Madam Speaker, I am encouraged by every effort to restrain federal 
spending, and I urge my colleagues to support this important 
resolution.
  Mr. HOLT. Madam Speaker, from the beginning of this debt debate last 
summer, I rejected the notion that America's creditworthiness should be 
used as a bargaining chip. Americans from all walks of life are 
wondering why Congress can't do the job that they sent us here to do: 
putting Americans back to work and revitalizing our economy. Now, here 
we are again, only two days into the new session of Congress, and the 
Republican majority is still playing political games and still trying 
to have us default on our debts. This resolution may have no chance of 
becoming law, but those who vote for it are nonetheless voting for 
default.
  I urge my colleagues to make the responsible choice: pay our bills, 
and pay them on time. Instead of engaging in partisanship and 
manufacturing crises, we should be coming together to fashion effective 
and bipartisan solutions to the jobs crisis.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today in opposition 
to H.J. Res. 98, ``Relating to the disapproval of the President's 
exercise of authority to increase the debt limit, as submitted under 
section 3101A of title 31, United States Code.'' This Joint Resolution 
is designed to prevent President Obama from raising the debt ceiling by 
$1.2 trillion. Under the agreement reached last summer, which 
Republicans supported, the President was given the authority to raise 
the debt ceiling. Republicans are now putting forth a resolution that 
is a direct contradiction to the agreement which we all felt was the 
right decision for our country.
  Today we are here pursuant to the Budget Control Act of 2011 that 
this body passed last summer. In the course of our efforts numerous 
concessions were made to placate Republicans just to do the business of 
the American people; to pay our bills and ensure that essential 
services were taken care of for the infirm, the elderly, our children--
in short: the most vulnerable in our society. This Republican led 
resolution is nothing more than an attempt to obstruct the government; 
the measure is expected to fail in the Senate. In the end, this measure 
will be a tremendous waste of both Congressional resources and time.
  The words to the resolution read as follows:
  ``Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves of 
the President's exercise of authority to increase the debt limit, as 
exercised pursuant to the certification.''
  These words, less than forty by my count, are an unabashed attempt to 
throw cold water on the mere prospect of an economic recovery. It is 
notable that some jobs have been created; however, our economy 
continues to gradually recover. You would think that Congress would be 
acting in a bipartisan manner, and not acting as poseurs in the 
legislative picture.
  I am disappointed to see that my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle are more interested in playing political games than improving the 
economy. Congressional Republicans are attempting to constrain the 
ability of Congress to deal effectively with America's economic, 
fiscal, and job creation troubles instead of working towards a 
bipartisan job creation bill.
  My Republican colleagues have put forth a measure that will impact 
the President's ability to raise the debt limit. This is a dangerous 
stunt and amounts to political theatrics that could result in our 
nation defaulting on its obligations. We are a nation that pays our 
bills. We are a nation that will provide for those among us who are 
unable to provide for themselves.
  To address our ever-growing and complex needs, the first debt ceiling 
was established in 1917, allowing the federal government to borrow 
money to meet its obligations without prior Congressional approval, so 
long as in the aggregate, the amount borrowed did not eclipse a 
specified limit.
  Since the debt limit was first put in place, Congress has increased 
it over 100 times; in fact, it was raised 10 times within the past 
decade, under both Democrat and Republican presidents; and last year, 
we were able to negotiate another compromise, and keep the country from 
default. I urge my colleagues not to undermine the agreement that was 
reached by attempting to block the President's ability to raise the 
debt ceiling.
  This Republican Congress has asked for a balanced budget amendment. 
It has codified the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction, which 
is possibly unconstitutional, and has had no impact on jobs and the 
unemployment problem. This illustrates what happens when Congress does 
not work together in a bipartisan manner, laboring for the American 
people. We must work together and compromise.
  At a time when our citizens need legislation that will fuel the 
economy and drive the engine of job growth, before us is a measure that 
will take us on the road to nowhere.
  Our country cannot afford to take the issue of raising our nation's 
debt limit lightly. It is reckless for Republicans to send confusing 
signals to international markets that could jeopardize our own fragile 
economic recovery.
  This country has made tremendous progress, even in the face of a 
cavalier attitude towards job creation and unemployment eradication on 
the part of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. Housing 
starts are improving; the economy is adding jobs at a gradual, 
steadied, yet consistent pace. Retail sales were up during the recent 
holiday season. The American people are out there living their lives, 
going about their business, and hoping that we get our act together 
here in Congress.


                 REPUBLICAN ACCORD: BUDGET CONTROL ACT

  This Joint Resolution is nothing more than a gimmick that has been 
implemented by Republican leadership to divert serious discussions 
about our debt limit and instead inspire partisan vitriol.


                      BUDGET CONTROL ACT LANGUAGE

  ``(a) In General.--
  ``(1) $900 billion.--
  ``(A) certification.--If, not later than December 31, 2011, the 
President submits a written certification to Congress that the 
President has determined that the debt subject to limit is within 
$100,000,000,000 of the limit in section 3101(b) and that further 
borrowing is required to meet existing commitments, the Secretary of 
the Treasury may exercise authority to borrow an additional 
$900,000,000,000, subject to the enactment of a joint resolution of 
disapproval enacted pursuant to this section. Upon submission of such 
certification, the limit on debt provided in section 3101(b) (referred 
to in this section as the `debt limit') is increased by 
$400,000,000,000.
  ``(B) Resolution of disapproval.--Congress may consider a joint 
resolution of disapproval of the authority under subparagraph

[[Page 97]]

 (A) as provided in subsections (b) through (f). The joint resolution 
of disapproval considered under this section shall contain only the 
language provided in subsection (b)(2). If the time for disapproval has 
lapsed without enactment of a joint resolution of disapproval under 
this section, the debt limit is increased by an additional 
$500,000,000,000.
  ``(b) Joint Resolution of Disapproval.--
  ``(1) In general.--Except for the $400,000,000,000 increase in the 
debt limit provided by subsection (a)(1)(A), the debt limit may not be 
raised under this section if, within 50 calendar days after the date on 
which Congress receives a certification described in subsection (a)(1) 
or within 15 calendar days after Congress receives the certification 
described in subsection (a)(2) (regardless of whether Congress is in 
session), there is enacted into law a joint resolution disapproving the 
President's exercise of authority with respect to such additional 
amount.


                         AMENDMENT NOT IN ORDER

  ``(e) Amendment not in Order.--A joint resolution of disapproval 
considered pursuant to this section shall not be subject to amendment 
in either the House of Representatives or the Senate.


                         PAYROLL TAX CUT FACTS

  For more than 360 days, the GOP House majority has failed to offer a 
clear jobs agenda. Congress left Washington for the holidays without 
extending the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits, for the entire 
year, an act that could have put money into the economy and promote 
jobs, by providing certainty to the American people and American 
businesses.
  The GOP is risking tax relief for 1.60 million Americans while 
protecting massive tax cuts for 300,000 people making more than a 
million dollars per year.
  Extending and expanding payroll tax cuts until the end of the year 
would put $1,500 into the pockets of the typical middle class family, 
and relieve them of the uncertainty.
  At least 400,000 jobs would be lost if Republicans block the payroll 
tax cut from being extended until the end of the year.
  In November, Senate Democrats proposed reducing it to 3.1 percent for 
2012, and cutting employers' taxes on the first $5 million in taxable 
payroll to the same level, which helps small businesses. To pay for the 
cut, the bill called for a 3.25 percent tax on gross income over $1 
million for single filers and married couples filing jointly, the so-
called ``Millionaire's Tax.'' This was a reasonable compromise, then, 
and now.
  There are other ideas floating around this Chamber that touch on tax, 
such as repatriation. Lowering taxes for the American people and 
American businesses is always a good idea, but piecemeal, scattershot 
approaches to tax reform can lead to undesirable outcomes.


                Targeted Tax Relief for American Workers

  The 2% payroll tax cut in effect for 2011 provided $110 billion of 
tax relief to 159 million American workers.
  If the payroll tax cut is not extended until the end of the year, a 
family struggling through the economic recovery making $50,000 will see 
its taxes go up by approximately $800.
  Expanding the 2% payroll tax holiday to 3.1% will cut Social Security 
taxes in half for 160 million American workers next year.
  Republicans targeted the unemployed by slashing 40 weeks of 
unemployment insurance. Such an action would have negatively impacted 
the lives of millions of families.
  These are the very families who are still struggling under the weight 
of the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. The Senate 
rejected this assault on families and the elderly. When we come back to 
the table in the coming weeks, let's focus on what matters: the 
American people.
  It was clear that our failure to act to support the Senate amendment 
to H.R. 3630 late last year would have resulted in twenty-two 
jurisdictions with the highest unemployment rates being the hardest hit 
these states are: My home state of Texas, Alabama, California, 
Connecticut, DC, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, 
Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, 
Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee and Washington.
  According to report released by the Department of Labor just weeks 
ago, 3.3 million Americans would lose unemployment benefits as a result 
of H.R. 3630 compared to a continuation of current law. In my home 
state of Texas alone, 227,381 people were in danger of losing their 
sole source of income by the end of January.
  There is nothing normal about this recession. Republicans seem to 
want to blame the unemployed for their unemployment. Until it was clear 
that the American people would not stand behind Republican efforts, 
House Republicans continued to put in jeopardy tax cuts for the middle 
class and aid for the unemployed. In this economy the unemployed are 
not to blame; it is the failure of Republican leadership to bring forth 
any job creating measures before this house. Currently, there are over 
four unemployed workers for every available job, and there are nearly 1 
million fewer jobs in the economy today compared to when the recession 
started in December 2007. In our nation's history there has never been 
so many unemployed Americans without work for such a long period of 
time. But the other side wants to send messages to their base by 
requiring drug testing of unemployed applicants? Really? Republicans 
are clearly out of touch.
  I stand with my fellow Congressional Democrats and remain committed 
to responsible deficit reduction. We must protect our citizens. By 
threatening to prevent an increase in the debt ceiling threatens our 
ability to pay for Medicare. Protecting Medicare represents the basic 
values of fairness and respect for our seniors that all Americans 
cherish, including the 2.9 million Texans who received Medicare in 
2010. I am committed to addressing the budget deficit by putting 
America's working families first. We should not be cutting programs 
that protect the everyday lives of Americans.
  Repeated attacks against Medicaid by Republicans, this Congress, are 
additional examples of wrong priorities that are poor choices for 
seniors and middle class families.


                          FACTS ABOUT MEDICARE

  Medicare covers a population with diverse needs and circumstances. 
Most people with Medicare live on modest incomes.
  Today, 43% of all Medicare beneficiaries are between 65 and 74 years 
old and 12% are 85 or older. Those who are 85 or older are the fastest-
growing age group among elderly Medicare beneficiaries.
  With the aging and growth of the population, the number of Medicare 
beneficiaries more than doubled between 1966 and 2000 and is projected 
to grow from 45 million today to 79 million in 2030.
  60% of nursing home residents are not on Medicaid at the time of 
their admittance into a facility. With the average annual cost of 
nursing home care being $60,000, the longer an individual remains in a 
facility, the more likely they are to deplete their financial resources 
and qualify for Medicaid coverage. Even after individuals deplete their 
assets, they are still required to apply their income, including Social 
Security and pension checks, towards their care costs, except for an 
average monthly $30 personal needs allowance.


                                POVERTY

  Madam Speaker not only will allowing America to default on its debt 
wreak havoc and chaos on financial markets around the world, but it 
will also be damaging to the most vulnerable members of our society. In 
essence it takes a hatchet to the programs Americans truly care about.
  In my district in Houston, Texas, there are 190,035 people living 
under the poverty line as well as 82,272 seniors and over 58,500 
seniors. In addition, children represent a disproportionate amount of 
the United States poor population. In 2008, there were 15.45 million 
impoverished children in the nation, 20.7% of America's youth.
  The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that there are currently 5.6 
million Texans living in poverty, 2.2 million of them children, and 
that 17.4% of households in the state struggle with food insecurity.
  If House Republicans' self destructive economic policies are allowed 
to play out it will threaten the viability of the programs that our 
Nation's seniors, children, and poor depend on for health and well 
being.
  Despite countless warnings from economists, business leaders, and 
Wall Street executives about the economic consequences, House 
Republicans are still holding the economy hostage by threatening to 
default on our debt and are putting the economy at risk by suggesting 
America might not pay its bills.
  Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke said defaulting on our debt 
would ``at minimum'' lead to ``an increase in interest rates, which 
would actually worsen our deficit and would hurt all borrowers in the 
economy.''
  Additionally, a coalition of 62 of the nation's largest business 
groups urged Congress to raise the debt limit: ``With economic growth 
slowly picking up we cannot afford to jeopardize that growth with the 
massive spike in borrowing costs that would result if we defaulted on 
our obligations.''
  According to a well respected moderate think tank, released a report 
outlining the consequences of not paying America's bills:
  642,500 jobs lost
  GDP would decrease by 1%
  Every mortgage would increase by $19,175
  Stocks would fall, the S&P dropping 6.3%
  And every 401(k) holder would lose $8,816
  The House Republican majority needs to stop threatening the American 
people and get

[[Page 98]]

to work to increase the debt ceiling so that our country can pay its 
bills.
  We must begin to focus on the real plights faced by our nation. We 
must find ways to raise revenues while also reducing spending. They 
must complement each other. Congressional Republicans must be prepared 
to allow everything to be on the table, including ending the tax cuts 
to the top 2% of the wealthiest people in our country.
  We need a serious measure that will discuss reasonably and 
responsible ways to increase the debt ceiling. A measure that will 
allow us to have a deliberative discussion on how to cut spending 
without cutting Medicare and Medicaid.
  If not, the failure to extend our Nation's debt limit would have 
harmful effects on job creation and the programs necessary to ensure 
the health and safety of our constituents.
  Perhaps my friends on the other side of the aisle are content to 
conclude that life simply is not fair, equality is not accessible to 
everyone, and the less advantaged among us are condemned to remain as 
they are, but I do not accept that. That kind of complacency is not 
fitting for America.
  Prior to the existence of the debt ceiling, Congress had to approve 
borrowing each time the federal government wished to borrow money in 
order to carry out its functions. With the onset of World War I, more 
flexibility was needed to expand the government's capability to borrow 
money expeditiously in order to meet the rapidly changing requirements 
of funding a major war in the modern era.
  To address this need, the first debt ceiling was established in 1917, 
allowing the federal government to borrow money to meet its obligations 
without prior Congressional approval, so long as in the aggregate, the 
amount borrowed did not eclipse a specified limit.
  Since the debt limit was first put in place, Congress has increased 
it over 100 times; in fact, it was raised 10 times within the past 
decade, and last year, we were able to negotiate another compromise, 
and keep the country from default. I urge my colleagues not to 
undermine the agreement that was reached by attempting to block the 
President's ability to raise the debt ceiling.
  Once again, the American economy hangs in the balance as the act of 
the President raising the debt ceiling becomes an irrelevant spending 
debate that is as unnecessary as it is perilous, as increasing the debt 
ceiling does not obligate the undertaking of any new spending by the 
federal government. Rather, raising the debt limit simply allows the 
government to pay existing legal obligations promised to debt holders 
that were already agreed to by Presidents and Congresses, both past and 
present.
  This resolution is a petulant attempt to undermine President Obama. 
The bill itself says it is a joint resolution ``relating to the 
disapproval of the President's exercise of authority to increase the 
debt limit.'' Exercise of authority. It does not say unlawful exercise 
of authority, or unconstitutional exercise of authority. The language 
of the bill itself makes it clear the President has the authority to 
raise the debt ceiling as indicated in the agreement reached on August 
2.


                PAYROLL TAX AND STOCK OPTION AMENDMENTS

  I attempted to offer in the Rules Committee meeting last night an 
amendment extending the payroll tax credit until the end of 2012, and 
to help reduce the budget deficit by closing a tax loophole that 
bridges the gap between book and tax accounting when stock options are 
awarded.
  The amendment closes a loophole that allows corporations to take a 
deduction for the fair market value of an exercised corporate stock 
option, over-and-above the value of the deduction that they receive 
when the option is issued. It does two significant things: raises money 
and shuts down an egregious loophole.
  But we were unfortunately subject to a closed rule, which is 
undemocratic.


                             STUDENT LOANS

  I would note that in completing this bill, which was, perhaps a 
Hobson's choice for some Members, it should be stated that we took aim 
at education funding via Pell Grants, Direct, and Stafford Loans, which 
are a lifeline to many of our most disadvantaged citizens.
  How will we compete for the new factories when we are offshoring 
education. I take some consolation in the fact that we did it to save 
the country.


                       ADOPTION TAX CREDIT FACTS

  Last night in the Rules Committee, I also attempted to offer an 
amendment yesterday evening to encourage and promote adoption, and if 
you take a look at the statistics on adoption and foster care, it 
really speaks for itself. Yet, we dither in this body while children 
out there need us, and we are failing them.
  The most recent data on all types of adoption, collected by the 
National Center for State Courts (NCSC) based right down the road in 
Charlottesville, indicate that an estimated 127,000 children were 
adopted in 2001. According to NCSC data, of adoptions in 2001, an 
estimated 46% were private (including tribal and kinship, such as 
stepparent), 39% were intercountry, and 15% were public agency 
adoptions.
  Today, in the United States there are an estimated 500,000 children 
in the foster care system and of those children, there are 130,000 
waiting for families to adopt them. The number of youth who ``age out'' 
of the foster care system by reaching adulthood without being placed in 
a permanent home has increased by more than 58 percent since 1998, as 
nearly 28,000 foster youth ``aged out'' of foster care during 2007 
which is appalling and unacceptable.
  In addition, 3 in 10 people in the United States have considered 
adoption; a majority of them have misconceptions about the process of 
adopting children from foster care. Approximately 45% believe that 
children enter the foster care system because of juvenile delinquency.
  And, I offer up forlornly the tale of the little baby who was found 
on the stairs of a house blocks away in South East Washington, DC, just 
this past weekend. A sad and heart-breaking story that serves to remind 
us how critical something like the Adoption Tax Credit can be. It is 
also a reminder that time is of the essence.
  Passing this resolution will not decrease spending; it will merely 
compromise our ability to pay for spending already authorized. This 
bill does nothing to reduce the deficit, or address the budget, it only 
risks our economic standing and ability to pay our nation's bills, 
while simultaneously hurtling the nation toward another debt ceiling 
crisis.
  Instead of spending time on Resolutions designed to cast the 
President in a negative light, it is time for this Congress to come 
together, and pass meaningful legislation that will benefit the 
American people. In his address to a joint session of Congress last 
September, President Obama gave this body a great opportunity to 
achieve bipartisan, job creating legislation that will invest in small 
business, help families that have been struggling with chronic 
unemployment, assist veterans in finding jobs, and invest in our 
infrastructure.
  It is time for a new sense of bipartisanship. It is time for Congress 
to work together to aggressively take on job creation. It is time to 
end these divisive tactics and compromise to encourage the rapid job 
growth the American people deserve. I urge my colleagues, Democrats and 
Republicans alike, to stand up and vote no on this partisan resolution; 
we can, and we must take this opportunity to declare our intent to do 
what is right, face what is hard, and achieve what is great.
  Instead of attempting to embarrass the President, I urge my friends 
on both sides of the aisle to come together, and focus on passing 
legislation that will help the American people by improving the economy 
and creating jobs. Now is not the time for partisan malice, now is not 
the time for H.J. Res. 98; now is the time for this Congress to do all 
it can to usher in a new age of American ingenuity and prosperity. H.J. 
Res. 98 is simply a way to engage in past battles, and I am voting 
against it in order to focus on the future.
  Mr. JOHNSON of Illinois. Madam Speaker, I rise today in support of 
H.J. Res. 98 disapproving of President Obama's request to increase the 
statutory debt limit of the United States. Though, I voted against the 
original bill authorizing this request, the Budget Control Act, I stand 
firmly in opposition to any increase in the debt limit and have been 
opposed in increases since 2005.
  Madam Speaker, reckless spending is crushing our economy. It must 
stop and we cannot continue to give a blank check with no strings 
attached to the powers that be. These powers, Republican and Democrat 
alike, have spent this country in to a fiscal catastrophe.
  I look forward to working with my colleagues to eliminate duplicative 
programs, wasteful spending, and reforming the way Congress does 
business. For example, I have recently introduced the Citizen 
Legislator Act and the Biennial Budgeting Act. These bills are starting 
the dialogue to create the fundamental changes so desperately needed in 
Washington as demanded by our constituents. Congress must be honest 
with itself and honest with the American people when discussing the 
defining issue of our time.
  Mrs. MALONEY. Madam Speaker, it comes as no surprise that my 
colleagues on the other side of the aisle are opening the second 
session of the 112th Congress by once again driving us to the brink of 
default. By voting to disapprove of the debt limit increase, the 
Majority is ignoring essential actions like extending the Payroll Tax 
Cut and unemployment

[[Page 99]]

benefits. The American people have called on Congress to create jobs, 
reduce the deficit, and grow the economy. Today's resolution does none 
of these and hurts the American economy by politicizing the debt limit 
increase. Now is the time for the House Majority to bring to the floor 
critical pieces of the President's American Jobs Act that would spur 
small business growth, rebuild our school and transportation 
infrastructure, and prevent layoffs in crucial jobs like teachers, 
firefighters, and police officers.
  Vote ``no'' on this irresponsible legislation
  Ms. RICHARDSON. Madam Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to H.J. 
Res. 98 because it is an empty gesture designed to waste time and 
provide a stage for political posturing.
  One hundred and seventy four House Republicans voted for the Budget 
Control Act in August which raised the federal debt limit and allowed 
the country to make good on the promises it made to the American 
people.
  Under the Budget Control Act, the debt limit increase that the 
President is requesting is automatically matched, dollar-for-dollar, by 
drastic spending cuts that target the poorest among us. Those cuts 
would hurt the people I represent in California's 37th District, and so 
I voted against it.
  Despite strong opposition from both sides, the Budget Control Act was 
passed, with a number of useless and unfair provisions, including this 
disapproval resolution, which lets House Republicans who voted for it 
in August turn around and withdraw their support.
  In this way, they can stand here today and make the same 
irresponsible arguments that they made last summer. Instead of working 
together to implement the American Jobs Act which would help create 
jobs and improve economic growth, they have chosen to squabble over the 
ability of the President of the United States to do his job.
  As ridiculous as it sounds, this is the trick that House Republicans 
are trying to play. It is entirely symbolic, of course, because if this 
resolution were to become law, it would result in the first default in 
U.S. history. A vote for this resolution is a vote against the full 
faith and credit of the United States and a slap in the face to its 
citizens.
  This kind of behavior is the main reason that Congress has lost the 
trust of the American people. It creates tremendous uncertainty within 
the business community and impedes economic growth. It also provides a 
terrible example to the rest of the world that should be able to look 
to us for guidance in times of turmoil.
  I urge my colleagues to reject this empty legislation and focus on 
creating a responsible, long-term budget that puts people back to work.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time for debate has expired.
  Pursuant to the statute, the previous question is ordered.
  The question is on the engrossment and third reading of the joint 
resolution.
  The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed and read a third 
time, and was read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the joint 
resolution.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. LEVIN. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 239, 
nays 176, answered ``present'' 2, not voting 16, as follows:

                              [Roll No. 4]

                               YEAS--239

     Adams
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Altmire
     Amash
     Amodei
     Austria
     Bachmann
     Bachus
     Barletta
     Barrow
     Barton (TX)
     Bass (NH)
     Benishek
     Berg
     Biggert
     Bilbray
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Black
     Blackburn
     Bonner
     Bono Mack
     Boren
     Boustany
     Brady (TX)
     Brooks
     Broun (GA)
     Buchanan
     Bucshon
     Buerkle
     Burgess
     Burton (IN)
     Calvert
     Camp
     Canseco
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Cassidy
     Chabot
     Chaffetz
     Coble
     Coffman (CO)
     Cole
     Conaway
     Cravaack
     Crawford
     Crenshaw
     Culberson
     Davis (KY)
     Denham
     Dent
     DesJarlais
     Diaz-Balart
     Dold
     Duffy
     Duncan (SC)
     Duncan (TN)
     Ellmers
     Emerson
     Farenthold
     Fincher
     Fitzpatrick
     Flake
     Fleischmann
     Fleming
     Flores
     Forbes
     Fortenberry
     Foxx
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Gardner
     Garrett
     Gerlach
     Gibbs
     Gibson
     Gingrey (GA)
     Gohmert
     Goodlatte
     Gosar
     Gowdy
     Granger
     Graves (GA)
     Graves (MO)
     Griffin (AR)
     Griffith (VA)
     Grimm
     Guinta
     Guthrie
     Hall
     Hanna
     Harper
     Harris
     Hartzler
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayworth
     Heck
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Herrera Beutler
     Huelskamp
     Huizenga (MI)
     Hultgren
     Hunter
     Hurt
     Issa
     Jenkins
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson (OH)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones
     Jordan
     Kelly
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kinzinger (IL)
     Kissell
     Kline
     Labrador
     Lamborn
     Lance
     Lankford
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Latta
     Lewis (CA)
     LoBiondo
     Long
     Lucas
     Luetkemeyer
     Lummis
     Lungren, Daniel E.
     Mack
     Manzullo
     Marchant
     Matheson
     McCarthy (CA)
     McCaul
     McClintock
     McCotter
     McHenry
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McKinley
     McMorris Rodgers
     Meehan
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Mulvaney
     Murphy (PA)
     Myrick
     Neugebauer
     Nugent
     Nunes
     Nunnelee
     Olson
     Palazzo
     Paul
     Paulsen
     Pearce
     Pence
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Poe (TX)
     Pompeo
     Posey
     Price (GA)
     Quayle
     Reed
     Rehberg
     Reichert
     Renacci
     Ribble
     Rigell
     Rivera
     Roby
     Roe (TN)
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Rokita
     Rooney
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Roskam
     Ross (FL)
     Royce
     Runyan
     Ryan (WI)
     Scalise
     Schilling
     Schmidt
     Schock
     Schweikert
     Scott (SC)
     Scott, Austin
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Smith (NE)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Southerland
     Stearns
     Stivers
     Stutzman
     Sullivan
     Terry
     Thompson (PA)
     Thornberry
     Tiberi
     Tipton
     Turner (NY)
     Turner (OH)
     Upton
     Walberg
     Walden
     Webster
     West
     Westmoreland
     Whitfield
     Wilson (SC)
     Wittman
     Wolf
     Womack
     Woodall
     Yoder
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)
     Young (IN)

                               NAYS--176

     Ackerman
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baldwin
     Bass (CA)
     Becerra
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Braley (IA)
     Butterfield
     Capps
     Capuano
     Carnahan
     Carney
     Carson (IN)
     Castor (FL)
     Chandler
     Chu
     Cicilline
     Clarke (MI)
     Clarke (NY)
     Clay
     Cleaver
     Clyburn
     Cohen
     Connolly (VA)
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costa
     Costello
     Courtney
     Critz
     Crowley
     Cuellar
     Cummings
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     DeLauro
     Deutch
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Donnelly (IN)
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Ellison
     Engel
     Eshoo
     Fattah
     Frank (MA)
     Fudge
     Garamendi
     Gonzalez
     Green, Al
     Green, Gene
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hahn
     Hanabusa
     Hastings (FL)
     Higgins
     Himes
     Hinojosa
     Hirono
     Hochul
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hoyer
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson Lee (TX)
     Johnson (GA)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kaptur
     Keating
     Kildee
     Kind
     Kucinich
     Langevin
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee (CA)
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lipinski
     Loebsack
     Lofgren, Zoe
     Lowey
     Lujan
     Lynch
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McNerney
     Meeks
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Moore
     Moran
     Murphy (CT)
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal
     Olver
     Owens
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor (AZ)
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Perlmutter
     Peters
     Peterson
     Pingree (ME)
     Polis
     Price (NC)
     Quigley
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Richardson
     Richmond
     Ross (AR)
     Rothman (NJ)
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sarbanes
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrader
     Schwartz
     Scott (VA)
     Scott, David
     Serrano
     Sewell
     Sherman
     Shuler
     Sires
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Stark
     Sutton
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Tonko
     Towns
     Tsongas
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Walz (MN)
     Wasserman Schultz
     Waters
     Watt
     Waxman
     Welch
     Wilson (FL)
     Woolsey
     Yarmuth

                        ANSWERED ``PRESENT''--2

     Landry
     Walsh (IL)
      

                             NOT VOTING--16

     Bartlett
     Berkley
     Brown (FL)
     Campbell
     Cardoza
     Farr
     Filner
     Giffords
     Heinrich
     Hinchey
     Inslee
     Marino
     Noem
     Reyes
     Simpson
     Speier

                              {time}  1626

  Mr. RUSH changed his vote from ``yea'' to ``nay.''
  Mr. McHENRY changed his vote from ``nay'' to ``yea.''
  So the joint resolution was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  Stated for:
  Mrs. NOEM. Madam Speaker, because I was attending the funeral service 
of Governor Bill Anklow today, I was unable to be present for the vote 
on H.J. Res. 98. If present, I

[[Page 100]]

would have voted ``yea'' in favor of the resolution.
  Stated against:
  Mr. FILNER. Madam Speaker, on rollcall 4, I was away from the Capitol 
due to prior commitments to my constituents. Had I been present, I 
would have voted ``nay.''

                          ____________________