September 13, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5985 

out Mr. Korb’s presentation online. He 

had a number of things that would 

really provoke a lot of important 

thought, and they’re online. You can 

go to the Progressive Caucus Web site 

and see some of that. 

Let me talk a little bit about what 

he said. Mr. Larry Korb was asked how 

best to summarize his take on the current defense budget, and he pointed to 

our poster, this one right here. Mr. 

Korb made himself very clear when he 

said, Don’t pay for a 20th-century military in the 21st century, which I think 

sums it up. I’ll elaborate more on what 

he had to say, but we had another expert who I think I would like to direct 

people to listen to, Ms. Maya 

Rockeymoore. She is the chair of the 

National Committee to Preserve Social 

Security and Medicare. She said, 

‘‘Changes to programs must be based 

on what is best for the beneficiaries, 

not on what is expedient for reducing 

America’s debt.’’ She also went on to 

add that Social Security, Medicare, 

and Medicaid are vital to the economic 

and health security of millions of senior Americans. 

Chad Stone was also there, and he 

talked about the jobs picture. He actually referenced our poster right here, 

as well. Chad Stone, he is the chief 

economist for the Center on Budget 

and Policy Priorities. He said that piling tax cuts on will only lead to Draconian cuts in programs that millions of 

Americans rely on. So we can’t go with 

this cuts-only approach. We’ve got to 

have some jobs, and we’ve got to have 

some investment. 

Steve Wamhoff from the Citizens for 

Tax Justice put it best. He said: 

I think all of us here agree that the most 

important job for Congress right now is to 

help the economy to create jobs. Tax cuts 

are one of the least effective tools to accomplish this goal. 

We had a great lineup. I urge folks to 

go on our Web site and study what they 

had to say. But I do want to go back 

for a moment to just talk about the 

ideas Larry Korb had to share. He mentioned sequestration. He said that sequestration is certainly not a smart 

way to cut the defense budget because 

it’s just an across-the-board cut, but 

close analysis and careful cuts and 

strategic ones could help a lot. He 

talked about how the Pentagon actually is pretty well endowed. He talked 

about how if the automatic sequestration defense cuts were to go into effect 

the fiscal year of 2013, non-war expenditures of the 2013 base, he said the budget will be reduced by about $55 billion 

down to what is about $500 billion and 

remain at that level in real terms for 

quite a while. He said that this will result in total reduction of about $500 billion over a decade from the projected 

levels in defense spending. He also went 

on to note that it also means that the 

Pentagon will still be spending more in 

2013 after sequestration than it did in 

2006. So they’re not going to be poor by 

any means. 

At the height of the Iraq war in 2006, 

we still would have been spending more 

than that if sequestration goes into effect, but he’s not just saying do sequestration. He’s actually promoting a 

strategic and smart way to do some 

cuts. He says that the United States 

military can do well, defend our Nation, and protect our country for about 

$500 billion, and that seems to make 

sense to me. We’d still be spending so 

much more than any other country in 

the world. 

He went on to also note that in short 

the military really doesn’t have a resource problem. They have what they 

need to defend the country. He noted 

that if sequestration goes into effect, it 

would not be ideal to just do acrossthe-board cuts, but there are a number 

of weapon systems that could be retired and a number of strategies for reducing the military budget that would 

not hurt national security, but would 

really put our country in a position 

where we are dealing with our financial 

problems in a forthright way. I think 

that it makes sense to really look carefully at these ideas. 

Maya Rockeymoore went on to note, 

when she talked about Social Security, 

that it does not contribute to our Nation’s deficit. If you look at Social Security, it actually runs a surplus, and 

we don’t need to cut Social Security. 

What we need to do is to recognize that 

this important program is a program 

that has been one of the most successful in the history of the United States; 

and if we abandon our commitment to 

our seniors and the disabled, we will be 

abandoning a core principle of our 

country. 

Mr. Chad Stone was important in his 

testimony, as well. As we wrapped up, 

I was most impressed that it’s not just 

about cuts, that we also need to grow 

our way out of this recession. That 

means investing in jobs. I think the 

American Jobs Act and many other 

things would put us farther down the 

line if we were to make those proper 

investments. 

That’s what I want to say about the 

economy tonight. I’d like to urge people, Madam Speaker, to focus their attention on the so-called ‘‘fiscal cliff.’’ 

It is coming up. We will see expiration 

of the Bush tax cuts. We will see expiration of the payroll tax. We will see 

expiration of the doc fix. We will see 

expiration of the AMT. There will be a 

number of things coming together all 

at the same time. There will be budgetary negotiations. 

But no matter what they are, they’ve 

got to include protection of our social 

safety net: Social Security, Medicare, 

and Medicaid. The military must share 

in the cuts. The wealthiest Americans 

must help us get some revenue. Finally, we’ve got to put jobs up front 

and center and grow this economy. 

With that, Madam Speaker, I yield 

back the balance of my time. 

f 

b 2030 

ADMINISTRATION IN REVIEW 

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. 

NOEM). Under the Speaker’s announced 

policy of January 5, 2011, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 

GOHMERT) for 30 minutes. 

Mr. GOHMERT. Madam Speaker, in 

the summer of 1973, it was a real honor 

for me to be selected to go on an exchange program. Of course I had to borrow the money to go and had to pay 

that back by working hard to take care 

of the loan, but I went on an exchange 

program to the Soviet Union, 1973, that 

summer. It was quite an eye-opener for 

me. 

Despite how wonderful the country 

was made to sound and how great it 

was that the government, they proclaimed, was the safety net for everybody in the country, they were proclaiming because the government was 

in charge of everything and in charge 

of everybody’s business, there was 100 

percent employment. They talked 

about how wonderful their socialized 

medicine was. 

There were eight Americans on this 

program that were allowed into the Soviet Union that summer, and we all 

had very different backgrounds, had 

different political views. There were a 

lot of big hearts in the group on both 

ends of the political spectrum. 

But, for me, a kid growing up in east 

Texas, it was an extraordinary education. Because even though people 

talked about how wonderful it was to 

have socialized medicine, everybody 

had a safety net because the government was the safety net, that country’s 

economic system was rotting from 

within. 

I went to a medical school. It reminded me of pictures of American 

medical schools from 40 to 50 years before. We went to an economic exhibition, kind of like a world’s fair in 

Moscow, at one point. It reminded me 

of the pictures from a 1940 or early 

1950s world’s fair, you know, things 

like tractors sitting out there with 

people oohing and aahing over tractors. 

I’m going, good grief, because I knew 

we didn’t need a world’s fair to see 

tractors like that. You could go to any 

used tractor dealer and find tractors 

that nice in the U.S., but everybody 

was told how wonderful it was. 

During the course of the summer, 

during the course of my time down in 

the Ukraine, I got to be good friends 

with a few of the students there. They 

were very standoffish at first. I spoke 

some Russian back in those days, and 

they spoke better English than I did 

Russian. But one guy in particular, 

he’d bring his dictionary with him and 

translate, because both of us—you 

know, it’s amazing. You take a language course—I had two years of Russian at Texas A&M. You know, you’re 

taught to converse about, ‘‘I’m going 

to the library’’ and ‘‘I have a dog’’ and 

these kinds of things, but when you 

want to talk about really serious life 

issues, we weren’t prepared for those 

things. We needed a dictionary so we 

could get our ideas across. 

At one point he said, ‘‘You seem surprised that our country wouldn’t want 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
H5986 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE September 13, 2012 

better.’’ He grabbed my shirt and he 

said, ‘‘We don’t have material this 

good.’’ I just had, you know, a regular 

polo-type shirt. He said, ‘‘We don’t 

have material this good for our individuals, and we fought two world wars on 

our soil. We don’t have it as good as 

you do in your country, that’s obvious. 

But people will always be reluctant to 

leave the best they’ve ever known for 

something they’re not sure about.’’ 

When we got to 1989 and the Soviet 

Union fell because of the economic disease and decay that was pushed into 

the death spiral by President Reagan’s 

actions, followed by President George 

H. W. Bush, it collapsed. Then we 

began to see all of the economic problems that were eating away at that 

country because the government tried 

to be the safety net for everything and 

everybody, and it won’t work that way. 

At a collective farm, way out from 

Kiev, I was surprised. I have worked on 

farms and ranches, and you usually try 

to get your work done before midafternoon when the sun gets its hottest, and 

that means you start early, start as 

close to daybreak as you can, and midmorning is prime time. 

Here it was midmorning, and these 

farmers were sitting around in the 

shade there in the farming village. I 

had been looking out at these fields. 

You could hardly tell what was cultivated and what wasn’t. They looked 

terrible. 

They had some really nice gardens 

right around their individual dwelling 

places. Yeah, those were kept up. 

Those they got to have for themselves. 

But the fields just didn’t look good at 

all. 

I tried to be nice, and in my best 

Russian I could, I said, ‘‘When do you 

work out in the fields?’’ They kind of 

laughed, and one of them said in Russian, ‘‘I make the same number of rubles if I’m here or if I’m out there, so 

I’m here.’’ 

Boy, was that a lesson in why a big, 

huge, nothing but safety net country 

can’t work. Free markets work until 

they decide it’s time to be socialistic, 

progressive, whatever you want to call 

it, and so they go that way. Then the 

free market forces fail because they 

have been taken over by progressive socialist structures. 

Now, it’s a good thought. I mean, it’s 

a wonderful idea to think, gee, well, 

we’ll just decree, as did the Pilgrims, 

as did the early New Testament 

Church, we’ll just bring everything 

into a common storehouse and split it 

equally. It sounds like a great idea. 

As the Apostle Paul found, as the Pilgrims found, eventually you have to 

say, You know what? This isn’t working out very well. We’re going to have 

to have some strict rules. The Pilgrims 

found, if you divide it up into private 

property and allowed people to eat 

what they grew, not only do they grow 

enough for themselves, but they actually would grow enough to use, trade, 

barter, sell, and that could be very effective. 

I heard my friend across the aisle 

mentioning earlier about the so-called 

Ryan voucher care, and I know they 

know—and in fairness to my friend 

PAUL RYAN, and it was great to see him 

on the floor this evening—that actually anybody over 55 gets Medicare. 

The Paul Ryan proposal, it’s not exactly like the bill that I previously 

proposed, but, you know, my friend’s 

brilliant. He’s on the right track. He 

says, if you’re over 55, you get Medicare. 

Now, I would go a step further, because I know what’s being proposed for 

those under 55 is going to end up being 

so much better giving control back to 

patients, getting control back between 

the doctor and the patients instead of 

having an insurance company or the 

government between the patient and 

the doctor. 

This business is a safety net. Clearly, 

they’re not talking safety net. They’re 

talking government takeover of everything. 

b 2040 

But PAUL RYAN’s plan would make 

sure that those under 55 had health 

care—and had it affordable. And so 

there are all kinds of reforms that need 

to be made. We did not need a full 

takeover of health care by the government. 

My friend had mentioned that, because we kept passing bills to repeal 

ObamaCare—and actually there were 

very few bills that dealt with a massive 

repeal of ObamaCare, but there were 

many bills that picked out specific 

parts. Look, friends across the aisle, 

you surely don’t want to be responsible 

for this terrible part of ObamaCare. So 

when people go back and say, Oh, you 

voted to repeal it 33 times, well, there 

were different aspects, and we couldn’t 

even get our friends to vote to repeal 

parts that they knew, once they found 

out after they passed it, what was in it. 

Wouldn’t even vote for things to be repealed that they knew would not be 

good. 

My friend said that, basically, the 

President called us here and asked us 

to pass his American Jobs Act. And I 

was so glad he brought that up. I’d 

about forgotten about the American 

Jobs Act. He came and stood right 

there, Madam Speaker, and told us, I 

forget, 16, 17 times: Pass my bill, right 

here, right now, over and over. And so 

I kept wanting to get a copy of the bill. 

He was chastising us for not passing it. 

Well, show it to me. Let me see it. So 

we kept calling the White House trying 

to get it. A week later, it was clear 

there was no bill. 

So I figured, well, if there’s no bill, 

and he keeps running around the country spending all the taxpayers’ money 

flying around on Air Force One, what 

sounded and looked like campaign 

stops, but government paid for it all— 

so he’s out there saying over and over 

and over, Tell Congress to pass my 

American Jobs Act. Pass the American 

Jobs Act. He had banners: Pass the 

American Jobs Act. American Jobs 

Act. I thought, Well, good grief, if he’s 

going to keep telling us we need to pass 

the American Jobs Act, there really 

ought to be one. So I put a 2-page bill 

together that would eliminate the 35 

percent tariff that we put on all American-made goods here in America, 

made by any company in America. It’s 

called a corporate tax; an insidious tax 

because it deceives people into thinking that, gee, if you tax the evil old 

mean corporations, then we don’t have 

to pay it. Baloney. If a corporation, a 

company doesn’t pass that tax on to its 

customers, clients, people buying its 

services, then they go out of business. 

That’s how it works. Thirty-five percent tax. The highest tariff that any 

country in the world puts on its own 

goods. And we were doing that. So 

mine says, let’s eliminate that. And 

we’d heard from people around the 

world that, good grief, if you just 

dropped your corporate tax 12 percent, 

manufacturing jobs would come flooding back into this country. 

You want to talk about pro-union. I 

know this side of the aisle wants to see 

the government unions grow more and 

more. I can never understand that. I 

can understand retired government 

workers needing a union because they 

don’t have leverage. But to have government workers in a country where 

the government is the people. All of us 

that are elected here, we’re public servants. Everybody that is hired by the 

Federal Government is supposed to be 

a government servant. We work for the 

people of America. Why in the world 

would you need a union to conspire 

against the people of America? Because, obviously, the role of any government union would be to get government bigger and bigger and more and 

more benefits, to the detriment of 

those who are paying for all of that. 

So, anyway, I don’t understand why we 

need Federal Government unions. Neither did Franklin D. Roosevelt. But 

that’s where all this goes. 

By the way, when we eventually got 

a copy of the President’s idea of a Jobs 

Act, we found that although he had 

been telling everybody in America he 

was only going to increase taxes on 

millionaires and billionaires, what he 

did was increase taxes on everybody 

that made over $125,000 individually. 

He said he was going after Big Oil. He’s 

going to end the giveaways to Big Oil. 

But when you look to around page 130 

or so, the pages that dealt with oil 

companies, they were not going to affect the Big Oil companies at all. But 

since 94, 95 percent of all the oil and 

gas wells in America are drilled and operated by independent oil companies, 

run by Americans, you look at what 

was eliminated, it was really only the 

things that were going to devastate the 

independents, some of them basically 

mom-and-pop-type services that 

worked on oil wells, gas wells. It’s 

going to shut them down. They 

wouldn’t be able to afford business. It 

would eliminate the passthrough deduction for investing in wells. If the 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
September 13, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5987 

independents can’t get people to invest 

in the wells, they can’t drill them. But 

the Big Oil companies, they don’t have 

to get people to invest in oil wells. 

They’ve got enough money to do that. 

It was incredible. I couldn’t believe 

it. I got it to CPAs that do work for 

independent oil and gas companies, 

small ones, and they were saying, Oh, 

my word. If this goes into law, we’ll be 

out of business. We can’t stay in business. What does that do? It ends 94, 95 

percent of the oil and gas wells in 

America. It also means that gasoline 

goes up even further than the doubling 

that this President has already done. 

Oh, wind energy. We heard about 

wind energy, smart grid. Think about 

it. We’ve had these hearings in our 

Natural Resources Committee. DOC

HASTINGS has done a fabulous job. 

Amazing the stuff you find out. And 

what we found out even just this week, 

last week, actually, when you talk 

about using wind or solar energy, since 

wind doesn’t blow all the time and sun 

doesn’t shine all time, and since we 

don’t have an effective way to hold 

electricity, there’s no massive battery 

that we’ve developed yet that holds 

significant amounts of electricity, so 

you have to use that electricity immediately, because you can’t hold it. 

When we get to the point where we 

have some way to hold electricity, then 

we’re on our way. Then solar, wind, 

those things will be a whole lot more 

helpful. But as it is, if you declare 

we’re going to have to have wind energy and we’re going to have to use 

solar energy, then for those times when 

the wind is not blowing or the sun is 

not shining but people still need electricity, then you’re going to have to 

have a coal-fired power plant, you’re 

going to have to have a natural-gas 

powered plant, a nuclear powered 

plant. 

So you’re going to have to have all of 

those things standing by to produce 

the energy when these other things 

don’t. You’re going to have to have different sets of wires taking electricity 

from the regular power plants and also 

send them out to the windmills way 

out wherever they are, where they’re 

out there chopping up endangered species, birds and all, and bring that electricity in. You’re going to end up having to have different wires going out to 

solar places. And so actually you’re 

going to be paying two and three times 

as much for energy because you have 

to have two to three times the infrastructure just so that you can say 

we’re getting some of our power from 

wind and from sun. 

What it did was set up more government. You read the bill like I did—and 

yes, I’m anal enough, I read some of 

these stupid bills, including the President’s idea of a Jobs Act. It created 

more government. It took over more 

control over the Internet. It took over 

more control of cable. It’s just a disaster. 

So I hear about the President’s great 

ideas for helping the economy, and I 

say thank goodness the President 

didn’t pass that disaster because the 

economy would be doing even far 

worse. Well, except for the people that 

suck out the millions and hundreds of 

millions and billions, like the President’s friends at Solyndra and things 

like that. 

b 2050 

By the way, I see today this article, 

September 13, 2012: ‘‘AP reports weekly 

U.S. jobless aid applications jump to 

382,000,’’ by Christopher Rugaber. 

Anyway, jobless claims jump to a 2- 

month high. Not exactly the progress 

the President says was happening. 

I’ve been mentioning, ever since I 

found out from Gold Star parents Billy 

and Karen Vaughn, they told me twothirds of the deaths and the wounds of 

our military in Afghanistan have occurred under President Obama. I 

couldn’t believe that. So we got the official numbers. I’ve got a poster around 

here somewhere. I don’t have time to 

use it right now. 

But when we got the official numbers, it turns out 70 percent of those 

who have been killed in Afghanistan 

have been killed under President 

Obama’s command, even though he’s 

been in command in Afghanistan only 

half the time of President Bush. 

Eighty-four percent of those people losing arms, legs, hands, terribly disabling wounds from IEDs and other injury sources, 84 percent of those have 

occurred under Commander in Chief 

Obama compared to the 16 percent that 

occurred under President Bush in Afghanistan. 

Article here from Breitbart by Tony 

Lee: 

On the somber 11th anniversary of the 9/11 

attacks, nearly 2,000 members of the U.S. 

military have died in Afghanistan since the 

war started in response to the attacks in 

2011. 

By the way, this President Obama, 

when he was running for President, 

called it the ‘‘good war.’’ 

But this article by Tony Lee goes on 

and points out what I’ve been talking 

about ever since Billy and Karen 

brought that to my attention, and I 

was greatly sorry that I did not know 

that without them pointing it out to 

me. 

It was also interesting to read an article by John Nolte, 12 September, 2012. 

Obviously, I like the guy. I like his 

cynicism. He says: 

Oh, that awful Mitt Romney. Just a few 

minutes before the White House itself disavowed the Cairo Embassy apologizing for 

free speech, Romney rightfully condemned 

the appeasing statement in no uncertain 

terms. And as a result, all day long, the corrupt media has been on a rampage to make 

Romney pay for the unpardonable sin of 

criticizing Their Precious One. 

You see, there’s no precedent for a political opponent immediately criticizing a sitting President after a foreign policy crisis. 

Oh, wait. 

Then it has reference to other articles where that’s gone on, a flashback 

to Kerry slamming Bush. Over and over 

it’s happened when it’s a Republican 

President. 

The article says: 

So with the entire institution of the media 

circling the wagons for Obama today, in a futile attempt to rescue him from his own foreign policy blunders, we now have CBS News 

riding to the rescue in order to give the same 

President who condemned Romney before he 

condemned the terrorists an opportunity to 

further politicize this tragedy: 

‘‘There’s a broader lesson to be learned 

here. Governor Romney seems to have a 

tendency to shoot first and aim later.’’ 

That’s what President Obama had to 

say. Yes, that’s the President talking 

about spouting off too quickly. 

But the President is right about Mitt Romney: guilty as charged. Romney did shoot 

first to defend the principles of free speech 

that the people who work for Obama in Cairo 

were so eager to fritter away. Yes, that damn 

Mitt Romney saw this outrageous example of 

simpering in the face of terror coming from 

American officials and immediately spoke 

out against it. 

It goes on to make a great point. 

Romney stood up for free speech. 

The movie that’s been fussed about 

sounds like a ridiculous thing that 

should not be done, except that this is 

America where people, whether it’s 

Howard Stern or anybody else, they 

have a right to say things, no matter 

how offensive they may be, unless they 

go so far that they actually harm other 

people. 

Another article: ‘‘No Record of Intel 

Briefings for Obama Week Before Embassy Attacks.’’ This was written by 

Wynton Hall, 12 September, 2012, and it 

points out: 

According to the White House calendar, 

there is no public record of President Barack 

Obama attending his daily intelligence briefing—known as the Presidential Daily Brief 

(PDB)—in the week leading up to the attacks 

on the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and the murder 

of U.S. Libyan Ambassador Chris Stevens 

and three American members of his staff. 

I’ve got to say. I read an account and 

a story of the administration reporting 

the name of one of the other three 

killed as part of the Libyan Embassy 

personnel. They gave that man’s name, 

pointed out he was a former SEAL 

team member but was in a private security force. Then, according to the article, the administration reported that 

he was killed while running for cover. 

Madam Speaker, I know something 

about SEAL team members. In the 

mind of a SEAL team member or a 

former SEAL team member, he is never 

running for cover. He is running for a 

place, if at all, from which to launch a 

better attack. Even in death, this administration can’t be respectful to the 

people that have laid down their lives 

for this administration. 

Even though the White House says 

that, gee, the President does read briefings, he just hasn’t been getting them 

personally, I would hope that he would 

start doing that. There are people’s 

lives at stake, and he is President. He’s 

such a fantastic campaigner, and I 

know it’s inconvenient, but I sure hope 

that he’ll get back to being President. 

To give credit where credit is due, it 

was very wonderful of the President to 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
H5988 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE September 13, 2012 

take a minute and a half or whatever it 

was, a minute, minute and a half, to 

pay tribute to those who laid down 

their lives for their country at the 

Libya Embassy where they didn’t have 

adequate security, and where this administration enabled al Qaeda and others to take over the government. It was 

nice of him to take a minute and a half 

to pay tribute to them giving their 

lives in the middle of his campaign 

event before he went on with the celebration. 

I recall President George W. Bush. 

People here know we certainly had our 

differences, and I certainly disagreed 

with him on a number of things. But I 

had great respect for the man. He said: 

How can I go play golf when I am Commander in Chief and I have sent soldiers, our 

military, into harm’s way? It just doesn’t 

feel right for me to be out on a golf course 

having a good time when our men and 

women are in harm’s way. 

But it did look like a fun celebration 

there that President Obama was having 

in Las Vegas. 

Another article: ‘‘Libyan Official: 

U.S. At Fault in Attacks.’’ Written by 

Awr Hawkins, 12 September, 2012. 

He points out that although the head 

of Libya’s National Assembly has formally apologized for the killing of U.S. 

Ambassador Christopher Stevens, other 

higher-ranking Libyan officials refuse 

to apologize and continue to contend 

the U.S. is to blame. 

The story talks about those contentions. Hey, it was our fault. Kind of 

like the ridiculous claims that sometimes those of us who were judges or 

prosecutors heard from a guilty rape 

defendant who said, ‘‘Well, you know, 

she was asking for it.’’ Excuse me? 

That was abominable what happened 

at the Libyan Embassy. It is a tragic 

fact that this administration, against 

the will of Congress, without even asking what the will of Congress was, said, 

Well, gee, the U.N., Organization of Islamic Conference, they want us there. 

So, why not? We ought to go. That’s all 

he needed. He didn’t care what Congress thought. 

He enabled them. He used American 

bombers. And then when the American 

public obviously was upset, eventually, 

that it was taking so long—hey, hey, 

keep in mind, it’s not the U.S.; it’s 

NATO. He may not have gotten a briefing that let him know that over 60 percent of the NATO military is American 

military. 

Here’s a flashback article. I just 

think it’s important, when these terrible things are happening around the 

world, that we take a quick look at 

how we got where we are so maybe we 

don’t keep doubling down on things 

that get Americans killed and hurt our 

national security. This article by Dana 

Loesch, 12 September 2012, ‘‘Flashback: 

Obama Admin Endorsed Muslim Brotherhood,’’ it points out from a New York 

Times article even August 1 this year, 

it said: 

Leon E. Panetta, the United States Defense Secretary, said on Tuesday that President Mohammed Morsi of Egypt was ‘‘his 

own man,’’ a strong declaration of American 

support for Mr. Morsi, a former leader of the 

Muslim Brotherhood whose future course in 

Egypt remains a great unknown to the 

Obama administration. 

Well, it didn’t keep us from enabling 

him to be there. 

Another article: ‘‘Obama Admits He 

Lost Egypt As American Ally.’’ It goes 

on to talk about how the President, because of our turning our back, or stabbing a man with whom this administration had made agreements, who was 

trying to uphold the Israeli-Egyptian 

Accord that was brokered by President 

Carter—one nice thing that President 

Carter did. President Obama now admits, well, they’re not really an 

enemy, but they’re not an ally. We lost 

them as an ally because of the incompetence of this administration. 

‘‘Obama Declines Meeting With 

Netanyahu,’’ and let me just finish 

with this. Although he doesn’t have 

time for Netanyahu, apparently he has 

time to attend a Jay-Z and Beyonce 

fundraiser. They’re fabulous entertainers, I understand that. But there’s 

a country to run, there are Americans 

being killed, and it’s time somebody 

around this town picked up the responsibility and acted responsibly. I don’t 

think doing a CR is the way to do it, 

but certainly not running off to fundraisers when people are giving their 

lives for you on foreign soil is the way 

to go either. 

With that, I yield back the balance of 

my time. 

f 

ENROLLED BILL SIGNED 

Karen L. Haas, Clerk of the House, 

reported and found truly enrolled a bill 

of the House of the following title, 

which was thereupon signed by the 

Speaker: 

H.R. 6336. An act to direct the Joint Committee on the Library to accept a statue depicting Frederick Douglass from the District 

of Columbia and to provide for the permanent display of the statue in Emancipation 

Hall of the United States Capitol. 

f 

ADJOURNMENT 

Mr. GOHMERT. Madam Speaker, I 

move that the House do now adjourn. 

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 9 o’clock and 2 minutes p.m.), 

the House adjourned until tomorrow, 

h 

Friday, September 14, 2012, at 9 a.m. 

EXPENDITURE REPORTS CONCERNING OFFICIAL FOREIGN TRAVEL 

Reports concerning the foreign currencies and U.S. dollars utilized for Official Foreign Travel during the second and 

third quarters of 2012 pursuant to Public Law 95-384 are as follows: 

REPORT OF EXPENDITURES FOR OFFICIAL FOREIGN TRAVEL, ROBERT KAREM, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, EXPENDED BETWEEN JUNE 10 AND JUNE 18, 2012 

Name of Member or employee 

Date 

Country 

Per diem1 Transportation Other purposes Total 

Arrival Departure Foreign 

currency 

U.S. dollar 

equivalent 

or U.S. 

currency 2

Foreign 

currency 

U.S. dollar 

equivalent 

or U.S. 

currency 2

Foreign 

currency 

U.S. dollar 

equivalent 

or U.S. 

currency 2

Foreign 

currency 

U.S. dollar 

equivalent 

or U.S. 

currency 2

Robert Karem ........................................................... 6 /10 6 /13 South Korea .......................................... .................... 1,050.03 .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 1,050.03 

6 /10 6 /18 Japan .................................................... .................... 2,262.29 .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 2,262.29 

Committee total ......................................... ............. ................. ............................................................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 3,312,32 

1 Per diem constitutes lodging and meals. 

2 If foreign currency is used, enter U.S. dollar equivalent; if U.S. currency is used, enter amount expended. 

MR. ROBERT KAREM, July 25, 2012. 

REPORT OF EXPENDITURES FOR OFFICIAL FOREIGN TRAVEL, BARRY JACKSON, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, EXPENDED BETWEEN AUG. 5 AND AUG. 13, 2012 

Name of Member or employee 

Date 

Country 

Per diem1 Transportation Other purposes Total 

Arrival Departure Foreign 

currency 

U.S. dollar 

equivalent 

or U.S. 

currency 2

Foreign 

currency 

U.S. dollar 

equivalent 

or U.S. 

currency 2

Foreign 

currency 

U.S. dollar 

equivalent 

or U.S. 

currency 2

Foreign 

currency 

U.S. dollar 

equivalent 

or U.S. 

currency 2

Barry Jackson .......................................................... 8 /5 8 /8 Vietnam ................................................ .................... 812,00 .................... 3 14455 .................... .................... .................... 15267.00 

8 /8 8 /10 Cambodia ............................................. .................... 349.00 .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 349.00 

8 /10 8 /12 Burma ................................................... .................... 512.00 .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 512.00 

8 /12 8 /13 Malaysia ............................................... .................... 255.00 .................... .................... .................... .................... .................... 255.00 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE