[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 2]
[House]
[Pages 2354-2355]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     SUFFERING UNDER SEQUESTRATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2013, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Gohmert) for 30 minutes.
  Mr. GOHMERT. Madam Speaker, the sequestration has taken place that we 
were told a year and a half ago would not. The President said during 
the debates last fall it would not, but it has taken place, as the 
President traveled around the country demonizing those of us back here 
that were hoping for a better way to cut, hoping that something could 
be reached in the way of an agreement that would have given more 
flexibility, but that didn't happen. People were too busy going off 
doing other things to be here in Washington with us and work out some 
kind of an agreement.
  One bit of good news, though: We had heard from the Secretary of 
Homeland Security that the lines would be long in the airport, there 
would be delays and there would be all kinds of problems. Initially, it 
was announced that FAA officials would be pulled from between 150 to 
200 airports. They were going to make America feel as much pain as 
possible. But with all the tough news for travelers, we can all be 
comforted. This is dated March 5, a story by Elizabeth Harrington: The 
TSA was able to seal a $50-million sequester-eve deal to buy new 
uniforms.
  So the lines will be longer traveling. We are told by Homeland 
Security they are going to make America feel pain because we managed to 
cut less than 2 percent of government spending when it's increased over 
20 percent over the last 4 years, when every American who works and 
pays taxes had their taxes go up 2 percent on January 1. This was 
merely taxes going up 2 percent, giving basically a tax on government 
for 2 percent, the same one America suffered.

                              {time}  1620

  That is the same amount basically, and yet we have officials in this 
administration who say, Oh, no. We can't stand a 2 percent cut. Heck, 
here at the House itself, our budgets have been cut 11\1/2\ percent 
over the last 2 years. We did it. And you've got TSA, you've got FAA, 
you've got Homeland Security, you've got people being released from 
custody that will put American citizens in jeopardy all to make the 
point that we can't live with a 2 percent cut like every hardworking 
American taxpayer has. At least we know that TSA will have new uniforms 
while the lines are getting longer.
  It also is worth noting a story here by Terence Jeffrey March 4 of 
this year, that President Obama borrowed nearly six times as much in 
February as the sequester cuts all year. I recall in 2006, the last 
year Republicans were in the majority before Speaker Pelosi took the 
gavel, Democrats on this side of the aisle appropriately beat up 
Republicans because we had a budget, an appropriations that year that 
spent $160 billion more than we brought in, and we should have gotten 
it balanced. They were right.

[[Page 2355]]

  I would never have dreamed that within a few years and with a 
Democrat in the White House, with a Democratic majority in the House 
and a Democratic majority in the Senate, that they wouldn't spend $160 
billion more than we took in; they'd spend $1.6 trillion more than we 
took in. And here, with all the gloom and doom and claims of how bad 
it's going to be--oh, it's going to be horrible--we find out that the 
President borrowed $253.5 billion in one month, the shortest month of 
the year, February, six times more than the sequester was with all the 
complaints.
  I have an interesting story here in Townhall.com by Heather Ginsberg: 
``President Obama's Golf Trip Could Have Saved 341 Furloughed Jobs.'' 
She goes on to outline the millions of dollars it cost for the last 
golf outing. That's pretty tragic.
  I think we have one of the most gracious and graceful First Ladies 
that we've ever had. She made a wonderful quote previously. She said:

       This is really what the White House is all about. It's the 
     people's house. It's a place that is steeped in history, but 
     it's also a place where everyone should feel welcome. And 
     that's why my husband and I have made it our mission to open 
     up the house to as many people as we can.

  That was our First Lady, and that was a wonderful position to take.
  So I'm sure she was not consulted today when the White House in its 
frustration that all of us in Congress--heck, the cut we are having in 
Congress is going to put us around a 20 percent cut of our budget in 
the House. The Senate hadn't cut themselves 11\1/2\ percent like we 
have, but we will have cut our own budget in the House of 
Representatives in every office at least 20 percent in 3 years' time. 
The President, even though his government has grown about 20 percent in 
4 years, could not live with just pulling back 2 percent of that 20 
percent increase.
  So, today, as the story indicates from today--this is from the 
Washington Examiner:

       Never say the White House isn't affected by sequestration. 
     The Visitors Office just notified Congress that tours of the 
     White House are canceled until further notice.
       Due to staffing reductions resulting from sequestration, we 
     regret to inform you that White House Tours will be canceled 
     effective Saturday, March 9, 2013 until further notice, the 
     White House email to legislative offices explains. 
     Unfortunately, we will not be able to reschedule affected 
     tours. We very much regret having to take this action, 
     particularly during the popular spring touring season.

  Well, knowing that, as the story reports here, we could have had 341 
Federal employees that could have kept their jobs and not been 
furloughed if the President had not taken his last golf outing. It 
seems to me that since there are so many people coming to Washington--
it appears to me as many Democrats as Republicans, possibly more--they 
have wanted, they have counted on the quote from the first lady. They 
were so looking forward to touring the White House.
  I filed an amendment with the Rules Committee this afternoon so that 
we can work together. The amendment to the continuing resolution of 
funds--and I'm hoping and begging and pleading that the Rules Committee 
will make this amendment in order. It's an amendment to H.R. 933 
offered by Mr. Gohmert of Texas:

       At the end of division C (before the short title), insert 
     the following:
       None of the funds made available by a division of this act 
     may be used to transport the President to or from a golf 
     course until public tours of the White House resume.

  That way we will both work together so the President will not be able 
to take a golf outing that causes 341 more Federal officials to be 
furloughed and lose their job, at least temporarily. Then perhaps by 
avoiding furloughing all these Federal employees, we'll be able to get 
the Democrats and Republicans across America, people that didn't even 
have a party because they're just Americans, they'll be able to get 
their tour of the White House, and all it will cost is one or two golf 
trips less.
  With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________