```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 120 (Monday, September 10, 2012)]
[House]
[Pages H5754-H5760]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                              {time}  2000
                           GOP FRESHMEN HOUR

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Landry). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 5, 2011, the gentlewoman from Alabama (Mrs. Roby) is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to be here this 
evening alongside some of my freshman colleagues.
  We want to have a real frank discussion with the American people 
tonight about a milestone that we hit just last week. This is not a 
milestone of historic significance that we're proud of, and that is 
that our national debt has now hit $16 trillion. This brings no pride 
or cause to celebrate to the American people, nor should it to any 
Member of this body or our friends in the Senate or in the White House. 
That is approximately $51,000 for every man, woman, and child in this 
country. It's unacceptable, and it doesn't, quite frankly, have to be 
this way.
  I want to point you to a few of the President's own words that he 
said when he was campaigning to be the President of the United States:

       We can't afford another 4 years of the kind of deficits 
     we've seen during the last 8. We can't afford to mortgage our 
     children's future on another mountain of debt.

  Where are we today? Today we're at a place that is far worse than 4 
years ago. With our debt now at $16 trillion, we've not seen anything 
significant from this White House in an effort to reduce our debt. 
Instead, all we hear about is new programs that are going to require 
more taxpayer dollars and not an effort to rein in this out-of-control 
spending. I want to talk about that tonight.
  Tonight we also want to focus on jobs. This is the number one issue 
facing the American people right now. We need to get America back to 
work. And this government, this body right here, we don't create the 
jobs, but we sure can help create an environment in which job creation 
is right. We have done a lot here in the House to do that. We've passed 
over 30 bills. They're sitting in the Senate awaiting action.
  We are going to continue to highlight what we've learned, in this 
hour, over the course of our time back at home.
  I have my friend from Colorado standing here. I would just say to 
you, Mr. Gardner, that I'm sure you can say the same about what you 
learned over the district work period. From traveling from town to 
town, from county to county in Alabama's Second District over and over 
again, I have witnessed that the debt has stifled job creation because 
all it has done is create more uncertainty.
  All of the regulation and red tape that has been passed in the 
previous Congress that this Congress has been unable to undue because 
of the lack of action in the Senate and ObamaCare, all of that has 
contributed to more and more uncertainty. People are hurting.
  I've traveled around and looked into the eyes of folks, and they 
can't take any more. Their businesses are on the line, and that then, 
in turn, is a reflection of what's going to happen in their households.
  Mr. GARDNER. The gentlelady from Alabama is exactly right.
  Thank you for your leadership on the economy, on getting this country 
turned around, and getting our businesses back in shape to hire once 
again.
  Over the past couple of years since being elected, I've traveled over 
65,000 miles to be in every nook and cranny of the district of eastern 
Colorado and northern Colorado. We've held 74 town meetings to make 
sure that we are listening to everybody's voices, to make sure that 
people have an opportunity to address their concerns, their ideas to 
make our government better, to make our economy grow and healthy once 
again.
  The points that you talk about, I don't know that anything is more 
relevant in the conversations that we have today than the point that 
was made at a town meeting just last week in Julesburg, Colorado, up in 
northeastern Colorado. It's just a hop, skip, and a jump from the 
panhandle of Nebraska. A young lady raised her hand and said:

       I'm a single mom. I have three kids at home. I've had two 
     jobs. Now I only have one. I'm looking for a second one. I 
     can't make ends meet because my job doesn't pay enough, and 
     energy prices continue to increase.

  She's trying to find health care for her children. Talk about 
somebody who is the front lines of our economy who is suffering because 
of the past 3\1/2\ years of failed economic policies.
  The Congressional Budget Office recently issued a review of what can 
happen at the end of this year if nothing is done to avoid the fiscal 
cliff to deal with sequestration and to deal with the looming tax 
increases. This is what the Congressional Budget Office has stated:

       In particular, large budget deficits and growing debt would 
     reduce national saving, leading to higher interest rates, 
     more borrowing from abroad, and less domestic investment--
     which in turn would lower the growth of incomes in the United 
     States.

  While we talk about growing the economy, while we talk about economic 
growth and the need to get businesses and companies around this country 
hiring again, at the same time there's this negative pressure being 
placed on them because Congress can't do its job to control spending. 
We are $16 trillion in debt. You mentioned it was nearly $51,000 for 
every man, woman, and child. We've got a 10-month-old at home. Our 10-
month-old

[[Page H5755]]

owes $51,000 as his share of the Federal debt. That's $51,000 apiece.
  That negative pressure, that mounting debt, deficits that are over a 
trillion dollars every year, makes it more and more difficult for 
businesses to have access to the capital that they need to grow. It 
makes it more and more difficult for companies to operate, because all 
of a sudden they find themselves competing with the Federal Government 
for those scarce resources.
  The next thing we know, government is going to have to look at tax 
increases to try to finance what's already over $200 billion a year in 
interest payments. Our businesses are saying: Government, can you get 
out of the way so we can let America work, so that we can run our 
businesses the way that we want to, not the way Washington wants to?
  At the same time, you've got a Congress, including the United States 
Senate, that hasn't passed a budget in the past 3\1/2\ years, hasn't 
done the fundamental duty that it's required to do, and that's to make 
sure that this government knows where it's going to spend its money, to 
make sure this government knows how much money it has coming in and how 
much money is going out. But they refuse to pass a budget.
  They refuse it, make no mistake, not because they think they need 
more time or because they need to study it more or come up with a 
different bill, no. They refuse it because they think it would be bad 
politically for them to vote on a budget. That's why the President's 
own budget received zero votes. The President's own budget not only 
received zero Republican votes, but zero Democrat votes.
  There are so many people across this country who are unemployed, who 
are looking for work. In fact, most of the universities around the 
country just went back in a couple of weeks ago. Those students are all 
looking for jobs and expecting jobs to deal with their student loans. I 
know we've talked about it many times.
  Mrs. ROBY. If we could spend some time on our young people, because 
that really paints the picture better than anything.
  The graduating class of 2012, when they were getting ready to face 
the real world in April of this year, the Associated Press reported 
that half of those college graduates were unemployed. That's half.
  Just to show a little bit of a comparison, since President Obama has 
taken office, the unemployment rate for 20-year-olds to 24-year-olds 
has increased more than a point from 12.4 percent to 13.9 percent. The 
median income for those under the age of 35 dropped by 10.5 percent 
from 2007 to 2010. That's more than any other age group. More of 
today's 20-somethings to 30-somethings are living with their parents 
than any of the generations that have gone before them.

                              {time}  2010

  So by comparison--and here's what we really highlight--this 
President's failure and this Congress' failure to get out of the way of 
job creation. In 1980, 17 percent of adults, 20- to 34-year-olds, had 
to live with their parents, and today that number is 24 percent. At a 
time when these young people coming out of college face mountains of 
student loan debt, they can't find jobs.
  Instead of looking and working to find ways to provide opportunities 
for these young people, President Obama and his policies are setting 
the stage for these young people to be more dependent on the 
government. Anyway, that's just to highlight your point exactly that 
that is the sector of our population that is the promise of tomorrow, 
and they are unemployed.
  Mr. GARDNER. Then add the fact that this generation that's graduating 
from college today is going to be left with a $16 trillion debt; and, 
by the way, that's just what it is today. It's growing each and every 
second. In just a few years, that number goes up dramatically to over 
$20 trillion if nothing is done to stop the runaway debt crisis that we 
have right now.
  You mentioned the Associated Press article that talks about one out 
of every two graduates from college today being unemployed or 
underemployed, but that same Associated Press report talks about this, 
taking unemployment into consideration, the job prospects for 
bachelor's degree holders fell last year to the lowest level in more 
than a decade.
  So we've seen this conversation take place about, you know, are we 
better off today than we were 4 years ago. Well, here's a statement 
from the Associated Press, when it comes to people who are graduating 
from college, that says, ``Taking underemployment into consideration, 
the jobs prospects for bachelor's degree holders fell last year to the 
lowest level in more than a decade.''
  How are these families going to make ends meet? How are recent 
college graduates, some who come out of college with a family, going to 
pay back their student loans? We have seen Federal student loans soar 
275 percent over the past decade. Over the past decade student loans 
have increased over 275 percent; yet job prospects are as bleak as they 
have been for 10 years or more.
  You know, I've got some great universities in my district, the 
University of Northern Colorado, Colorado State University. We just 
visited Northeastern Junior College. We have been all over the 
community college system in our district talking about the challenges 
that they face trying to make sure that their students have the jobs 
that they need when they come out of school because what's happening, 
you see the higher debt load. Then because the economy is so tough, 
people are taking jobs that are lower paying just to try to make ends 
meet.
  This country has prided itself on always making sure that for 
generation after generation we have greater opportunities, that we open 
more doors for our children. That's the same thing that ought to be, 
the same kind of idea that ought to be facing the recent graduates 
today.
  This upcoming December, next May, they ought to be looking at job 
prospects that are even greater than their older brothers or sisters, 
even greater than their parents' generation. But the fact is those jobs 
don't exist because the policies of the last 4 years have made it more 
and more difficult for the country's businesses to grow and expand.
  Mrs. ROBY. You mentioned your colleges in your district. Actually, 
there are some great colleges in or right nearby in Alabama's Second 
District: Alabama State University, Faulkner University, Troy 
University, and Huntingdon College. But let me just highlight real 
quickly Alabama's 2-year college system where we have incredible 
workforce development programs, honing skills in young people that can 
immediately go out into the workforce, and they deserve better than 
these lofty promises.
  Did you know that since President Obama was inaugurated in January of 
2009, the manufacturing sector has shed 590,000 jobs, 590,000 jobs?
  Mr. GARDNER. When was that you said?
  Mrs. ROBY. This was since President Obama was inaugurated in January 
of 2009.
  The number of Americans receiving food stamps as of April 2012 was 
46.1 million. I heard today one of our colleagues say one in seven, one 
out of every seven Americans is receiving some sort of nutritional 
assistance. That is astounding. That is astounding.
  We've painted a picture here that is bleak, and we're telling the 
American people what they already know because so many of them are too 
aware of this because they're the ones that are suffering from this 
administration. I just want to say that we have solutions.
  We have solutions where we can change things and the private sector 
can thrive, but that is going to mean getting the government out of the 
way. We need the leadership in the Senate to have the political courage 
to stand up and take up our jobs bills, our energy bills that reduce 
regulation and does just that, gets the government out of the way.
  Mr. GARDNER. This past week I had an opportunity to visit a business 
in Colorado, a manufacturing business in Colorado. It's a multi-
generation family business that was started by this gentleman's dad 50 
years ago. He's actually retiring from the business, and his son is 
going to take over the business, third generation, a manufacturing 
business in Denver. They've got around 300 employees, spread out in the 
western United States region.
  I asked him, I said, you know the past couple of years are you doing 
better now than you were then? His answer was no on any level. If you 
ask

[[Page H5756]]

him about what his bottom line is, his company's profits? No, they're 
not better off than they were. If you ask them about the number of 
employees he has? No, they're not better off. In fact, they've 
struggled to try to make sure that they are able to keep the employees 
that they have been able to keep.
  This is something else that goes unreported, that work, that employee 
who is usually working a 40-hour work week or maybe a little bit more 
is now working a 30-hour work week or a 32-hour work week, because as 
an employer he feels the opportunity to try to do everything he can to 
keep these employees working, to keep their families with a job in the 
household. In order to do that, because their business is down, because 
their sales are down, they've actually now found themselves in 
situations where they are reducing hours, which means less take-home 
pay. In fact, if you look at the past 4 years, we've seen middle class 
pay, take-home pay, go down by about $4,000.

  If employment is decreasing and, again, if you look at those 
employment numbers that just came out this past week, for every one 
person who found a job, four people quit looking. So you can see that 
this business isn't alone in trying to make ends meet, to try to build 
a better tomorrow.
  We talked about the regulations that they face, and I talked about 
some of the recent changes that have been made, whether it's financial 
services legislation. In fact, one of the interesting points that we 
were talking about regulations, and I am sure you have heard a great 
deal about businesses in your district that are facing challenges with 
regulations and the ever-increasing cost of regulations, but this 
particular business, they were talking about how, because of the tough 
times that have hit their contracts, the people they contract with, the 
people who buy the goods from them, they are now actually having to 
float the cost of that business on their own books a lot longer. 
Because of the difficulties with some of the financial legislation 
we've seen, they're finding it even more difficult to do that.
  Here you have a company that's trying to make it work with their 
customers so that they can buy their goods by holding their receivables 
a little bit longer; but they're finding pressure now from financial 
legislation that makes it more difficult to do that. So the government 
is getting them both ways. The government has failed to come up with 
the policies to get government out of the way so that our businesses 
can grow. Yet when you have somebody coming up with a solution to try 
to grow their business, government policies there are affecting that 
and impeding their ability to do that.
  Mrs. ROBY. Absolutely. You know, when you talk to business owners, or 
at least when I have, you'll hear them say, but there was a time when 
regulators came into your business to try to make it more effective or 
a safer environment in which to work, but that time is long gone. Now 
the regulators are there to find problems and fine you.
  I want to give you one example that was astounding to me. A fellow 
that's in the construction business was explaining to me that he had a 
friend that's a roofer that had a $700 job, to make a $700 profit on a 
roofing job. His crew was over there at this home all day long, had the 
ladder, they were going up and down.
  After 5 o'clock, a regulator was driving down the road, pulled over 
and noticed that he was afraid the ladder didn't come over the eave of 
the roof just far enough to fit within the regulatory requirements.

                              {time}  2020

  He stopped and wrote that fellow up to the tune of $8,000. A $700 job 
and an $8,000 fine. These guys had been going up and down that ladder 
all day.
  We all agree that not every regulation is bad, but this is an 
environment that has gotten out of hand; people with too much time on 
their hands and not coming into businesses in the spirit of helping 
businesses thrive.
  Mr. GARDNER. And I think that's why we have to start talking about 
solutions for this country. We all have examples of regulations that 
have gone amok.
  I was dealing with a business in the district just the other day that 
talked about a product that they were trying to handle. It was a very 
environmentally sensitive product that they were trying to remove and 
actually do some environmental mitigation from a cleanup site that they 
were working on. And this particular company was required to keep this 
product both wet and dry at the same time; a regulation that said you 
had to keep it wet until you moved it or stored it, and then you had to 
keep it dry. Well, you've got to dry it down in order to move it, but 
yet they faced the possibility of being fined because of this 
particular action.
  Again, the solutions we need. This Congress has passed solutions, and 
I'll mention the REINS Act.
  The REINS Act was a bill that we passed several months ago with 
strong support from both sides of the aisle. This is one of the bills 
that has passed the House and has moved over to the Senate, where it 
just sits stacking up like cordwood. Once again, here we have an 
opportunity to do something, a proactive solution.
  The REINS Act simply says we're going to take a look at the cost of a 
regulation. We're going to get an idea of how much some regulation 
costs, and if it exceeds a certain threshold, then we're going to let 
that come back to Congress for review before it can go into effect. 
It's saying, hey, let's take a look at this. Let's create some kind of 
an opportunity for Congress to review a regulation that has a 
tremendous impact on the economy, taking over a hundred million dollars 
out of our economy to comply with the regulation. Let's take a look at 
it and make sure that the cost and benefits are in line to make sure 
that the benefits outweigh the cost, to make sure that doing it is 
actually worth it and it doesn't cost jobs that we so desperately need. 
And so the REINS Act passed and it's waiting over in the Senate.
  Now, some people may say, well, that's just a partisan idea, that's 
just a Republican idea. Well, let's take a look at what some of the 
States do.
  In my home State of Colorado, there's a process called the Rule 
Review Act, the Rule Review bill. This bill comes up every single year 
in the State legislature, and it's a chance for the State legislature 
to do exactly that, to review the rules that pass out of the executive 
branch agencies. Every year, the State legislature gives a thumbs up or 
a thumbs down to those regulations, because in Colorado we understand 
how important it is to make sure that government's not getting in the 
way, how important it is to make sure that we actually have responsible 
rules that move the ball down the field instead of creating penalties 
every time you turn around.
  And so the Rules Review bill taken to the United States Congress 
becomes the REINS Act. And the REINS Act is a good way for us to check 
and provide that balance with the executive branch to make sure that 
we're not putting too much of a burden on our businesses.
  Mrs. ROBY. Right. Let's just go back in time for a minute and talk 
about some of these other repeals.
  We have the Boiler MACT provisions, the Cement MACT, net neutrality, 
the regulating farm jobs. We can go down the list one by one by one and 
talk about the efforts that we have taken here in the House. With the 
strength of the numbers here, some of these have been with bipartisan 
support that we've passed these measures. And yet again and again and 
again, it's just time after time after time it's sitting in the Senate 
without any action.
  All you have to do is go look at the budget that the House has passed 
the past 2 years that Chairman Ryan put forth out of committee and came 
to the full floor. You mentioned the President's budget where there 
were zero votes--zero votes. We talk about offering solutions to the 
American people to look that small business owner in the eye and say, 
``Yes, I am working for you; yes, I have a solution for you; yes, I 
have a way to get out of your way,'' which is what we've done, and our 
budget outlines very, very specifically what these solutions are.
  Our spending is out of control, which in turn, like you already 
mentioned, just takes it a whole other step that this Congress is not 
doing their job, and therefore the jobs are not being created by the 
private sector, period. It all comes down to that.
  Mr. GARDNER. And I know you serve on the Agriculture Committee

[[Page H5757]]

here in the House of Representatives, and I'm sure that you're hearing 
from some of your interests in agriculture about uncertainty.
  Mrs. ROBY. Absolutely.
  Mr. GARDNER. And one of the things that I've heard over the past 
several months--and, in fact, I held a series of farm bill roundtables 
earlier this spring, where one of the things we heard about so much, 
and this is part of the fiscal cliff that we're facing, is the death 
tax, the death tax that this Nation faces going back into the lower 
exclusion rates as of January 1.
  Let me give you an example. I'm sure you've heard this time and again 
from the people that you represent.
  One of the farm roundtables that we held, a young man from Eaton, 
Colorado, stood up and said: With the estate tax coming back in at the 
end of this year, beginning of next year, we'll be forced to pay for 
our farm for a third time, and we simply can't afford it.
  This is a young man who wants to go on into life in agriculture. This 
is somebody who wants to be the next generation standing up to grow our 
food and fiber that this Nation depends on. But yet you've got a 
government policy that's going to say: We know you've invested, we know 
you've grown your business, you've made investments into the land that 
you need to make your operation successful, but because somebody died, 
we're going to tax them. And that's part of the fiscal cliff that 
this country faces at the end of this year.

  There are farmers and ranchers around the State of Colorado, around 
this country, who are not trying to figure out how they're going to 
pass on their operation to the next generation, pass on their operation 
to the next generation because of a government policy that says: You 
know what? You've been too successful, and we're artificially going to 
place this barrier so that it's going to hurt you.
  It's not just farmers and ranchers that it affects.
  Mrs. ROBY. It's all businesses.
  Mr. GARDNER. It's all businesses. That's right.
  Mrs. ROBY. But the problem with our farming communities is that they 
are, in a lot of instances, they own a lot of land. So they have wealth 
when it comes to land ownership, but they may not have the cash. And so 
when the government comes along to tax the farm upon the death of a 
parent that wants to pass it down, they've got to sell the farm to pay 
the tax, and that's where our farmers lose out every time.
  And there are numerous other businesses throughout this country where 
they may be cash poor. They may have some assets but they may be cash 
poor, and so they end up having to sell it off in order to pay the 
government for that company's success.
  Mr. GARDNER. And you mentioned it, too. It's not just about cash in 
the bank. It's not just about how much money you have. It's about the 
assets that you have. And so your example where you may be cash poor 
but still hit this line, I think, is compelling to not only the farmers 
and ranchers, but you're right, to small businesses around the country 
who may own a restaurant, who may be trying to expand a sand and gravel 
operation, but they're going to be hit by this estate tax, which means 
they've got to sell, break it up, and not be able to pass it on.
  Mrs. ROBY. You just add our lack of tax reform, which we so 
desperately need, and I know that we are committed to that here in the 
House majority. We do have a plan that we've set out as it relates to 
those reforms. We know that American businesses are faced with an 
unbelievably complicated and cumbersome Tax Code, combined, over 30 
percent on businesses, not to mention the problems with the estate 
taxes. It makes the U.S. the second highest corporate tax rate among 
developed nations in the world. So the U.S. Federal rate is 35 percent. 
It's nearly 10 percentage points higher than our other competitors. 
That, on top of all of the other issues that we've highlighted.
  I mentioned the manufacturing jobs. I don't know about you, but I get 
this question all the time: Where have all the manufacturing jobs gone? 
People always highlight that we just chase these jobs offshore. And 
it's because we have created this environment in which business owners 
don't have a choice. If they're going to turn a profit, they have to do 
what is the benefit for their family to make that hard-earned dollar.
  I remember hearing a colleague give an example. He was sitting on an 
airplane next to a guy that made things. He made things, he produced a 
product, and he wanted to make them in the United States of America. 
But when it came down to it, the bottom line--he thought he was going 
to open his plant right here, but when it came down to it, they hadn't 
taken into account the corporate tax rate and the difference between 
that and the next country where they could manufacture his product.

                              {time}  2030

  That sealed the deal. They are not manufacturing in the United States 
because of the environment in which we have.
  Mr. GARDNER. So you have got a government policy that actually is an 
impediment to job creation here. A company trying to bring jobs back 
in, but because of the cost of doing business here is so much higher 
than elsewhere, they had that unfair choice of how are they going to 
make things work, how are they going to be successful.
  Mrs. ROBY. I was going to say in June for the first time in 44 
months, small businesses cited taxes, taxes above poor sales as the 
single most important problem that they are facing today. Taxes.
  Mr. GARDNER. We talked about solutions when it comes to regulations. 
We've talked about the REINS Act. But here again with taxes, we have 
come up with solutions. We have voted to make sure that the estate tax, 
the death tax, doesn't come back in at those lower exclusion numbers 
breaking small businesses around the country. We've made sure that we 
avoid the massive tax increases that loom, once again, at the end of 
this year on families, middle class families. Thousands of dollars for 
middle class families around this country increase in taxes if nothing 
is done, and that's why the House of Representatives has passed a 
measure to make sure that those taxes don't increase, to make sure that 
we are making it easier for people to keep more of their own money so 
they can invest it in their families, so they can invest it into job 
creation, in their businesses.
  If this Congress adopts the President's plan, if this Congress does 
nothing, hundreds of thousands of small businesses around this country 
are going to see tax increases like we've never seen before. Tax 
increases will make it more difficult for them to make ends meet. And 
that's why the House has acted to make sure that we are dealing with 
the fiscal cliff to make sure that we are not making it more difficult 
in this country to succeed.
  Mrs. ROBY. Absolutely. Again, by virtue of a comparison, with the 
President's proposed tax hike, deficits would still total 6.6 trillion 
over the next 10 years according to his own budget. But by comparison, 
our budget, the House Republican budget, would reduce deficits compared 
to his by 3.3 trillion while lowering taxes on small businesses and 
spurring economic growth. That's the difference.
  Mr. GARDNER. Well, and I think that's the key, actually, as you 
mentioned, spurring economic growth. And we can talk about what happens 
to our economy with this policy or this legislation. But the bottom 
line is we've got to address that debt and deficit and only economic 
growth, long-term economic growth, is going to help us address our debt 
and deficit situation, but a high debt and deficit make it impossible 
for long-term economic growth.
  So you have kind of got a circular problem here that for whatever 
reason the United States Senate, the President, hasn't taken seriously.
  And just talk a little bit about the summer of recovery that was 
supposedly going to occur a couple of years ago after a trillion 
dollars was spent on the stimulus, money that went to companies like 
Solyndra that went bankrupt and the United States taxpayers are going 
to be out over half a billion dollars because they'll never get repaid.

[[Page H5758]]

  You've got the stimulus bill that was supposed to lead to the summer 
of recovery, and yet here we are with 43 straight months of 
unemployment at or above 8 percent. Now, the American people know that 
even that number is not right because they know that maybe they have 
got a job that is only part time or maybe they are working full time 
but certainly not at the level that they know is to their full 
potential. It certainly makes it more difficult for them to meet the 
needs of their families. So that 8.3 percent number doesn't even count 
the people who've given up looking for work, doesn't even count the 
number of people who are underemployed.
  So, the fiscal cliff, you've got millions and millions of Americans 
out there knowing what this Congress refuses to do, and that is if 
Congress will act to adopt these jobs bills that we've passed over to 
the Senate, if Congress will adopt the House budget that actually puts 
this country on a road and path to growing the economy, to preserving 
and protecting the promises that we have made to future generations, 
that number is going to come back down. It's not going to be 8.3, 8.1 
percent. It's going to be lower. Millions of people will be back at 
work because of the bills and legislation that this body has passed, 
most with bipartisan support.
  Mrs. ROBY. You know, to use the President's words again, because 
these are direct quotes, so let's look at a couple of things.
  Last April, President Obama said, ``We have to live within our means, 
we have to reduce our deficit, and we have to get back on a path that 
will allow us to pay down our debt.'' That was the President just last 
April.
  But also I want to make sure that there is no misunderstanding. This 
is the President's own words in February of 2009: ``I am pledging to 
cut the deficit by half by the end of my first term in office.'' And I 
know we are kind of circling back to how we began this hour tonight, 
but since the President has taken office, our national debt has 
increased by $5.3 trillion.
  Mr. GARDNER. And 5.3 trillion, now, I think there's a statistic out 
there that shows that that's more money than the amounts of money spent 
by or the deficits between George Washington and Bill Clinton 
combined--or maybe it's George H.W. Bush. The fact is, we've never seen 
a period in our Nation's history where unemployment has been matched by 
a failure to recognize the needs of the American people, where debts 
are allowed to skyrocket, where you can say on TV one thing, pledge to 
the American people that you will cut the deficit in half, and then the 
next thing you know it's up by $5 trillion.
  Maybe the question isn't are you better off today than you were 4 
years ago, but maybe the question ought to be are you better off today 
than you were $5.3 trillion ago?

  Mrs. ROBY. Well, your son can attest to that because he's 10 months 
old and already owes, his share is, what, $51,000 at 10 months old. You 
know, we both have young children and this is why we are here. We're 
here for them because we want this country to be as great for your 
children and mine and all America's children and grandchildren and 
generations to come. And quite frankly, it is horrendous that we would 
leave this situation on their backs.
  We keep hearing about balancing the budget on the backs of the middle 
class. How about spending massive amounts of taxpayer dollars on the 
backs of my children and my children's children. This is where the 
future of this country is dependent, and if we don't get serious about 
this now, why wait? Why are we waiting until November? Why is the 
leadership in the Senate waiting until after the election to take on 
problems that are serious now?
  As you said before, the clock keeps ticking up. The debt keeps 
accumulating between now and November. It's not like the 16 trillion is 
just some arbitrary number. I mean, it's a huge number, but it doesn't 
stand still. It's going to continue to increase.
  As I explained when I am in town halls about the debt ceiling, the 
debt ceiling is like calling your credit card company and saying to 
your credit card company, ``I need you to increase my credit limit 
because I don't have any cash to pay you the interest on what I already 
owe, on the debt I already owe.'' That's where we are. And that's on 
the back of Margaret and George and your children and all of those 
other children and grandchildren of Americans. As you can tell, as a 
mom it makes me upset, and that's why we're here.
  Republicans in the House majority have taken action on a number of 
things that have already been mentioned tonight: we've repealed the 
government takeover of health care. Ride down the road in any district 
in this country and talk to a small business owner about that, and you 
will find out very quickly that they're either going to be close to 
being out of business or they're going to go out of business completely 
if this law is fully enacted.

                              {time}  2040

  We have stopped massive tax increases here in this House that one 
independent analysis said could destroy more than 700,000 jobs--you 
highlighted that earlier. We have replaced these indiscriminate 
spending cuts from sequestration with commonsense solutions by calling 
on, again, our friends in the Senate whose budget reconciliation--it's 
hard to do that if you don't have a budget--but through budget 
reconciliation, through commonsense cuts instead of just across the 
board, and rein in this wasteful government spending. And with the 30-
plus bills that you and I have highlighted some portion thereof in this 
discussion tonight that are sitting collecting dust in the Senate, all 
30 of these jobs are job-creating, energy-producing bills that are 
sitting in the Senate collecting dust.
  Mr. GARDNER. You talk about those bills, the regulations that we've 
passed. You talk about the things that we have done to avoid the fiscal 
cliff, the things that we have done to avoid sequestration. There's a 
word that's been missing that we haven't used tonight: leadership. It 
takes leadership to address these issues. That's what we have provided 
through so many of these bills that we have talked about--leadership to 
make sure that hundreds of thousands of small businesses don't have 
their taxes increased; leadership to make sure that farmers and 
ranchers can continue their operations without worrying about a death 
tax that will prevent them from passing on their land to the next 
generation; leadership to make sure that the sequestration is carried 
forward. Yes, we reduce spending, but we do so in a more responsible 
fashion, a way to make sure that we don't jeopardize the ability of our 
men and women in uniform to defend our country and to protect 
themselves.
  I want to talk a little bit about the issue of sequestration because 
that's something that we haven't met. And the issue of leadership, once 
again, crops up. It just keeps coming forward where the House has led 
and we hear crickets from the other side of town.
  The American people, I don't know if they were following what 
happened with the White House just this past Friday. Last week, the 
White House announced that it will miss the legal deadline for 
delivering a report to Congress on the spending cuts from sequestration 
that will take effect in January. Now, we hear a lot of complaints 
about, well, the Congress hasn't done this and the Congress hasn't done 
that, but here's a law that says you've got a deadline to present your 
ideas for leadership to the American people. And I guess it must have 
been too tough because they're not going to comply with it--they didn't 
comply with it.
  Mrs. ROBY. Well, and you will see, again, further action from 
leadership here in the House on that, calling on the President to 
outline exactly what this is going to look like. And like you said, he 
hasn't. It's just one more on the list of uncertainties for job 
creators.
  I see our colleague and our friend, the gentleman from Kansas, has 
joined us. Certainly feel free to jump in here.
  Mr. HUELSKAMP. I appreciate the opportunity. Just like my colleagues, 
I've spent a little time in the real world. Some call it a recess; for 
many of us it was time to go back home. I admit in this job, I'll admit 
that I would much rather not be here and be at home. But what I heard 
at home is many of the same things that my colleagues are saying 
tonight: Washington, can you get your act together? In this Chamber, we 
passed many, many things that would hopefully improve the economy, but 
one thing that

[[Page H5759]]

seems to be on the mind of my colleagues is pretty clear.
  Times have changed. I know some of my colleagues have been here a 
while, and they think that perhaps in the White House it's the same 
old, same old. But when we hit the $16 trillion mark for debt, that 
raised another red flag about what's going on in Washington.
  I am a Republican. My colleagues tonight here are Republicans as 
well. We're not going to say it's a Democrat problem; we're not going 
to say it's a Republican problem. At the end of the day it is a 
Washington problem: it's the fact that we can't get our act together 
here in Washington. We can vote in here to free up job creators. We can 
vote in here to roll back regulations. But at the end of the day, we 
have $16 trillion of debt.
  Like my colleagues, I have young children. I have four young kids. 
Each one of them, they've done nothing wrong yet--they do a few things 
wrong, I catch them every day at that--but through no fault of their 
own, they've got $15,000 they're going to owe on some spending that's 
already happened before my freshman colleagues and I arrived at this 
place--$15,000, and it is growing every day.
  Under this President, trillion-dollar deficits have become the new 
norm. The last year of the previous administration, $452 billion of 
deficits in 1 year, I think the President, then Senator, was bemoaning 
the fact of what a dastardly amount that was, and here we have doubled 
and tripled that amount, and each year for the last 4 years added over 
$5 trillion of debt. You know, that adds up.
  My constituents always keep saying, well, I can't quite understand 
what's a million, a billion, a trillion. It's pretty hard to explain to 
them--they don't understand a billion. But for the last 3\1/2\ years, 
this President, this town--Washington--has added $3.5 billion of 
borrowing every single day, 3\1/2\ years for $3.5 billion. That's 
unsustainable, and they want us to solve this problem.
  But again, when folks like us gathered here see and hear the concerns 
of Americans that we have a spending problem--it's not a revenue 
problem. If it was a revenue problem, we simply would let off the gas 
pedal a little bit on regulations and we would take care of that. 
Everybody knows that. Every job creator comes to me and says, Tim, I'd 
like to invest more. I was visiting with a businessman who owns a 
packaging company--American Packaging in Hutchinson, Kansas. He said, 
Tim, I employ 43 employees--and by the way, he did build it--I employ 
43 folks. When my father-in-law bought this business in 1987, there 
were five people employed here. And you know what, Tim, here's what I'd 
like to do: I'd like to hire two more people. Here in Washington, two 
more people doesn't add up to anything, but for two families in 
Hutchinson, Kansas, it would mean the difference between paying college 
tuition for their kids, whether or not they are able to update their 
used car, or whether they would be able to make the mortgage or down 
payment on their house, or whether they might even go on a vacation. 
That's the difference here.

  Today, we have 23 million Americans--just like the two in 
Hutchinson--that don't have a job or are looking for more work. And 
Tony at American Packaging says this, he says: Just give me some 
certainty. Tell me what the rules are going to be, whether it's the tax 
uncertainty that happens at the end of the year--I'm sure it's been 
described here. If nothing changes, if Washington doesn't get its act 
together, if the President doesn't step up to the plate and help us, 
we're going to have the single largest tax increase in American 
history--and I dare say in the world's history--happen at the end of 
the year if we don't get help from the administration, if the Senate 
Democrats are not willing to provide certainty on taxes.
  In addition, we have the regulatory uncertainty that's been 
discussed. We'll have the health care uncertainty. The provisions of 
ObamaCare are rolling in. Small businesses like Tony's do not know, 
what do we have to cover? I don't want to hire two more people because 
I might be fined if I can't provide for them. It's that type of 
uncertainty that says, you know what? I can invest, I'd like to make 
some money--and the businesses are there not just to create jobs; 
they're actually there to make a profit for the owners and to perform a 
service for the public. They're not here to work for Washington. But 
that's actually what does happen if you let the free market and free 
enterprise system work.
  I had a video where Tony spoke. And I must say what shamed me the 
most was the response from our local newspaper--that was actually, I 
believe, fronting for this administration. Because Tony talked about 
the fact that he and his father-in-law built this business, and the 
newspaper said: No, you didn't build that business; the Government 
played a key role in making that happen. You know, the government 
wasn't there with his father-in-law when he hired employee six, 
employee seven, employee eight. They weren't there. They didn't take 
the risk. Now we have this whole town wants to take credit, including 
this President, every time someone hires a new person. But they don't 
take credit or they don't take fault for the fact that millions of 
Americans have quit looking for work in the Obama economy.
  And it won't be perfect under any President. It never is. Washington 
can't dictate how an economy ebbs and flows. What I trust in, though, 
is the American people and American businessmen like Tony that say, 
hey, I would like to invest, Tim; just give me the certainty to do so 
and hire two more folks. It doesn't mean anything, again, in 
Washington, but it means something in the real world. So I appreciate 
my colleagues being here.
  One of the things that the newspaper did mention--actually, it was a 
taxpayer-funded college professor--he said, you know, I just want to 
let you know that the free enterprise system is a charade. Of course, I 
guess if you work for a public university free enterprise might be a 
charade. But this is the type of thought that invades many in the White 
House. It certainly invades where this gentleman teaches. But the fact 
is free enterprise is not a charade. What it is about is individuals 
taking a risk, making decisions free from me, free from you, Cory, free 
from Martha's demands, free to make and take those risks. That's how 
the economy will continue to grow. That's how we will build the best 
economy in the world. And that's the economy that's being threatened 
with $16 trillion in debt.
  Again, this is not our problem, it's not their problem; it's 
America's problem to solve this. I think we're making progress in the 
House, and we're going to continue to move forward.
  So that's a little bit of what I've heard in my district about their 
concerns about where we're going to head and where we need to head. I 
have had town hall after town hall--about 140 town halls. And usually 
at every town hall somebody comes up to me and says, Tim, I'm doing 
pretty well--and my district actually is doing fairly well, despite a 
massive drought which impacts Colorado as well.

                              {time}  2050

  And we could talk about water all night, but we probably better not. 
We're friends right now--just kidding.
  But they come up to me and say, Tim, you know, I think I'm going to 
do fine. I'm ready for retirement. A guy, 62, about, told me this the 
last time, but I'm worried about what kind of America I hand on to my 
children and grandchildren. And this current state of affairs, this $16 
trillion, he says, I'm ready to do what it takes. I'm ready to keep 
working a little bit longer, do a little more, make a little more 
sacrifices, a little more investments, because I want a better country 
than I was given, because my parents gave me a better country than they 
had and my grandparents did the same.
  That's the type of promise. That's why I get optimistic. That's why I 
like to go home, because that's what you guys hear at home as well as I 
do. They're optimistic. They're hopeful about the future, despite 
what's going on here in Washington, D.C.
  Mr. GARDNER. And the gentleman from Kansas and I share a common, we 
share the border, eastern Colorado, western Kansas. And so many of the 
challenges that my farmers are facing your farmers are facing. And 
you're right, we won't get into water tonight. We'll save that for 
another day, another time. But the fact is we could both use more of 
it. And the way we

[[Page H5760]]

can use more of it is we store more water. Yet we have policies that 
are keeping us from storing more water, adding yet to the uncertainty 
of our farmers and ranchers who desperately need it.
  And so whether it's the tax increases that we see at the end of this 
year, if nothing is done, the estate tax, income tax rates, capital 
gains rates, and you mentioned that this isn't just a big tax increase. 
This isn't just a large one for the United States. This is the largest 
we've ever seen, not only in the United States, but around the globe.
  Mr. HUELSKAMP. Fifty-five percent death tax. I mean, that's the one 
that hits the heart of my small businessmen and -women. And they're 
trying to hand on their business to their children or their 
grandchildren or someone else they choose, and government's going to 
come in and grab up to 55 percent of that estate, and that impacts 
farmers and ranchers in particular, and many other small businesses.
  The very heart of economic recoveries in this country have always 
been driven by small business. It isn't the folks that hire a thousand 
people at a time. It's the ones that take--add one person, or take a 
part-time person to full time. And that's what I'm hearing at home, and 
they're frustrated. But they're ready to roll up their sleeves and go 
to work, and they expect Congress and Washington to do the same.
  Mr. GARDNER. You mentioned optimism for the country, and I carry the 
same optimism, too, because the people that we work for believe that 
this continues to be the greatest Nation on the face of this Earth. If 
we have Congress, if we have Washington that's actually getting its job 
done, that will pass the regulations to make it easier to do business--
excuse me, to repeal the regulations in this country to make it easier 
to do business, to make sure that we don't increase taxes to hurt their 
small businesses, better days are still ahead of us.
  Mr. HUELSKAMP. Oh, tremendous days are ahead of us. They say, hey, 
just stop doing a little of what you're doing. I'll even admit it. Some 
of them even say, you know what, what's there right now, as much as I 
don't like it, if you could just keep it the same. Two years. Give us a 
breather. Give us a moratorium. We'd like to roll them back, but give 
us a moratorium, some certainty on taxes, on regulations, on health 
care, and, Tim, we'll take care of your revenue problems. We'll do it 
for you.
  Mrs. ROBY. The only thing that we all can agree on is that the only 
thing that is certain is that uncertainty; and to hear the consistency 
in all of our experiences back home, it's astounding to me why we 
cannot--why the President and the leadership in the Senate cannot see 
this, because if they're really listening to the same Americans that 
you and I are listening to, they would hear the same message that we've 
brought to the floor tonight.
  Mr. Speaker, the choice for the President and the Senate is very, 
very clear. It's either political paralysis that leads to certain 
economic catastrophe, or bipartisan leadership that puts us on a path 
towards prosperity.
  And I would just ask that they keep in mind a few people. Remember 
who this economy has hit the hardest. You've heard stories tonight in 
this hour of those business owners that have said just that.
  Remember the moms at the grocery store that are trying to put food on 
the table for their family or gas in the car to get to their one or 
maybe two jobs.
  Remember the young people, the recent graduates that we've talked 
about that can't find a job; and half of them in the class of 2012 are 
unemployed and they are drowning in debt.
  All of these groups, all of these groups, they deserve leadership out 
of Washington, not lip service.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________
```