H5754 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE September 10, 2012 

their report today saying that Congress is now less popular than telemarketers. 

This is one of the most despised Congresses in American history, and it has 

been led by Republican leaders who, 

again, have shown that they are more 

interested in trying to weaken this 

President than in trying to strengthen 

our country. This is with regard to 

issue after issue, whether or not it’s 

the farm bill, whether or not it’s the 

postal reform—where we have a system 

that is literally now technically in 

bankruptcy—whether it’s the Violence 

Against Women Act, whether it’s getting budgets done in regular order, 

whether it’s diffusing sequestration, 

whether it’s averting the fiscal cliff. 

We went home for 5 weeks without 

acting on any of these measures because of a recess motion that the 

Speaker put forward. The country is 

basically sitting there, waiting to see 

whether or not we have either a shortterm future or a long-term future, 

which all of these issues are so critical 

to determining. We are going to be 

watching this agenda over the next few 

days. What we saw today from the majority leader’s office indicated no farm 

bill, no postal reform bill, nothing related to any measures to try and deal 

with sequestration. We have seen a donothing agenda this week by the majority following 5 weeks of being back 

in the districts. 

The American Farm Bureau was 

doing a cross-country barnstorm about 

the fact that we need to get that measure passed so we can create some certainty and horizon for the men and 

women who are getting up every morning and milking cows and planting 

crops and harvesting crops, those who 

desperately, particularly with the 

drought conditions in the Midwest, 

need to have some certainty that there 

is going to be crop insurance in place 

to make sure that they are not going 

to go bankrupt. 

We have a measure which passed in 

the U.S. Senate—it’s a bipartisan bill— 

which saves the taxpayer $23 billion, 

and yet we have a leadership which 

won’t even bring up a farm bill for consideration. The bill that came out of 

committee wasn’t perfect, but it is a 

measure which we need to act on to 

send to conference so that the agriculture sector of this country can have 

some confidence about what kind of future they’re going to have beyond the 

next few weeks or until September 30, 

which is when the law of this country 

reverts back to that of the 1949 farm 

bill. 

So that’s the message which I certainly heard on my break and that Mr. 

BRALEY heard on his break. I think 

we’re going to hear it this week when 

representatives of commodity crop 

groups—the American Farm Bureau, 

the American Farmers Union—are 

going to be gathering in the U.S. Capitol and demanding action so that we 

can at least allow one sector the ability and the confidence to know that 

they have some future, both short term 

and long term. 

With that, I yield back the balance of 

my time, Mr. Speaker. 

f 

b 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 31⁄2 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 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
September 10, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE 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 31⁄2 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. 

b 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 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
H5756 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE September 10, 2012 

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. 

b 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 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
September 10, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE 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. 

b 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. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
H5758 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE September 10, 2012 

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. 

b 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 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
September 10, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE 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 

31⁄2 years, this President, this town— 

Washington—has added $3.5 billion of 

borrowing every single day, 31⁄2 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. 

b 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 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
H5760 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE September 10, 2012 

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. 

f 

LEAVE OF ABSENCE 

By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to: 

Mrs. NAPOLITANO (at the request of 

Ms. PELOSI) for today. 

f 

BILLS PRESENTED TO THE 

PRESIDENT 

Karen L. Haas, Clerk of the House, 

reported that on August 7, 2012, she 

presented to the President of the 

United States, for his approval, the following bills. 

H.R. 4240. To reauthorize the North Korean 

Human Rights Act of 2004, and for other purposes. 

H.R. 1402. To authorize the Architect of the 

Capitol to establish battery recharging stations for privately owned vehicles in parking 

areas under the jurisdiction of the House of 

Representatives at no net cost to the Federal 

Government. 

H.R. 3670. To require the Transportation 

Security Administration to comply with the 

Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act. 

f 

ADJOURNMENT 

Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I move that 

the House do now adjourn. 

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 8 o’clock and 54 minutes 

p.m.), under its previous order, the 

House adjourned until tomorrow, Tuesday, September 11, 2012, at 10 a.m. for 

morning-hour debate. 

f 

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, 

ETC. 

Under clause 2 of rule XIV, executive 

communications were taken from the 

Speaker’s table and referred as follows: 

7439. A letter from the Branch Chief, Planning and Regulatory Affairs, Department of 

Agriculture, transmitting the Department’s 

final rule — Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Disqualified Recipient Reporting and Computer Matching Requirements received August 28, 2012, pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Agriculture. 

7440. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental 

Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency’s final rule — Bacillus thuringiensis 

eCry3.1Ab Protein in Corn; Exemption from 

the Requirement of a Tolerance [EPA-HQOPP-2012-0109; FRL-9357-4] received August 7, 

2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the 

Committee on Agriculture. 

7441. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental 

Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency’s final rule — Flutriafol; Pesticide Tolerances [EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0875; FRL-9348-8] 

received August 7, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 

801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Agriculture. 

7442. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental 

Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency’s final rule — Paraquat Dichloride; Pesticide Tolerances [EPA-HQ-OPP-2010-0637; 

FRL-9357-1] received August 7, 2012, pursuant 

to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on 

Agriculture. 

7443. A letter from the Director, Regulatory Management Division, Environmental 

Protection Agency, transmitting the Agency’s final rule — Residues of Didecyl dimethyl ammonium chloride; Exemption 

from the Requirement of a Tolerance [EPAHQ-OPP-2011-0139; FRL-9356-6] received August 7, 2012, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); 

to the Committee on Agriculture. 

7444. A letter from the Chairman and Chief 

Executive Officer, Farm Credit Administration, transmitting the Administration’s final 

rule — Farm Credit Administration Board 

Meetings; Organization; Standards of Conduct and Referral of Suspected or Known 

Criminal Violations; Definitions; Disclosure 

to Shareholders; Accounting and Reporting 

Requirements; Rules of Practice and Procedure; Practice Before the Farm Credit Administration; and Disclosure to Investors in 

System-wide and Consolidated Bank Debt 

Obligations of the Farm Credit System; Unincorporated Business Entities (RIN: 3052- 

AC65) received August 28, 2012, pursuant to 5 

U.S.C. 801(a)(1)(A); to the Committee on Agriculture. 

7445. A letter from the Under Secretary, 

Department of Defense, transmitting a report of a violation of the Antideficiency Act, 

Air Force Case Number 10-04; to the Committee on Appropriations. 

7446. A letter from the Under Secretary, 

Department of Defense, transmitting a letter 

on the activities of the Defense Industrial 

Base Capabilities Fund during FY 2011, pursuant to Public Law 108-136, section 814(f)(2) 

(117 Stat. 1545); to the Committee on Armed 

Services. 

7447. A letter from the Under Secretary, 

Department of Defense, transmitting a letter 

on the approved retirement of Vice Admiral 

Dirk J. Debbink, United States Navy, and 

his advancement to the grade of vice admiral 

on the retired list; to the Committee on 

Armed Services. 

7448. A letter from the Under Secretary, 

Department of Defense, transmitting a letter 

on the approved retirement of Admiral John 

C. Harvey, Jr., United States Navy, and his 

advancement to the grade of admiral on the 

retired list; to the Committee on Armed 

Services. 

7449. A letter from the Under Secretary, 

Department of Defense, transmitting a letter 

on the approved retirement of Lieutenant 

General Frank A. Panter Jr., United States 

Marine Corps, and his advancement on the 

retired list in the grade of lieutenant general; to the Committee on Armed Services. 

7450. A letter from the Principal Deputy, 

Department of Defense, transmitting authorization of five officers to wear the authorized 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with HOUSE