H5928 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE September 13, 2012 

promote and enact policies that keep 

our middle class strong and provide opportunities and a safety net for those 

striving and fighting to become middle 

class and to get into the ranks of the 

middle class, to enhance their quality 

of life. But far too many Americans are 

continuing to suffer joblessness and 

have dropped out of the middle class 

and into poverty because of this Republican do-nothing Congress. 

Republicans in Congress have continually blocked efforts to extend and expand vital safety net programs which 

safeguard millions of American families and children who face stark realities of unemployment, hunger, and 

homelessness. Further, their continued 

blocking of critical Federal support to 

our States and localities has caused 

widespread layoffs of dedicated public 

servants like teachers, police officers, 

and firefighters in communities all 

across the country. 

This attack on our country’s public 

servants has had a particularly hard 

impact on communities of color and on 

women across the country. I just have 

to tell you, African Americans and 

women have long found job opportunities in the public sector, in public employment. African Americans, in particular, often found work with the city 

or the State because of racial bias and 

barriers and obstacles in the private 

sector. 

Mr. Speaker, the American people 

know that you can’t have it both ways. 

Government spending cannot kill jobs 

on one hand, when spent on hiring 

teachers and police officers, and create 

jobs on the other hand. And those services are desperately needed throughout 

our country. We need more police officers on the street. 

My colleagues on the other side of 

the aisle must begin to accept the reality of history. Federal investments in 

our Nation’s infrastructure, in our 

schools, and in programs that help 

struggling families are critical to 

boosting our economy and spurring our 

economic recovery. 

Tax cuts for millionaires don’t pay 

for themselves; they create massive 

deficits and weaken our country. 

Markets don’t regulate themselves. 

Deregulation allows rampant fraud and 

creates massive bubbles that inevitably 

burst and threaten our entire economy. 

We need a balanced approach that ensures that every American pays their 

fair share and is invested in a united 

and prosperous future for all Americans of every background. We need a 

balanced approach that ensures that 

millionaires and billionaires pay their 

fair share so that we can reignite the 

American Dream for all. 

How this Nation treats the least of 

these is not just a measure of our Nation’s moral priorities, but it will directly impact whether the American 

Dream survives and thrives for all. Let 

us not forget that our greatest 

strength is the freedom and opportunity that our democracy created to 

allow us to work together to build the 

largest and most prosperous middle 

class the world has ever known. 

b 1030 

But this means that we must reduce 

and we must eliminate poverty. And I 

hope in the few days that we’re left 

that this Congress will come together 

and figure out a way to pass the President’s American Jobs Act, because in 

that legislation we have critical investment to rehire our police officers, 

teachers and firefighters who desperately need their jobs, but also the 

services are desperately needed in our 

communities. 

f 

COMMEMORATING NEIL 

ARMSTRONG 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

Chair recognizes the gentleman from 

Alabama (Mr. BROOKS) for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Speaker, I represent Alabama’s Fifth Congressional 

District, home to NASA’s Marshall 

Space Flight Center, home to the Saturn V rocket that carried American astronauts to the Moon. 

Today, the Fifth District’s talented 

scientists, engineers, and others work 

tirelessly to develop the Space Launch 

System for manned space flight both to 

and beyond low Earth orbit. 

In the early 1960s, President John F. 

Kennedy challenged America to do the 

impossible, send an astronaut to the 

Moon and safely return him. As a 

young boy in the 1960s, I vividly remember the Earth tremble, dishes rattle, and windows pulsate as America 

tested our Saturn V rocket on nearby 

Redstone Arsenal. In 1969, America’s 

hard work paid off. 

I will never forget watching the 

grainy, black-and-white footage on TV 

as American astronaut Neil Armstrong 

stepped on to the lunar dust. The thrill 

of that moment, our pride in America, 

our awe of what Americans could do 

have belonged to all Americans ever 

since. Armstrong’s walk on the Moon 

helped define America and changed 

world history as we left Earth behind 

and ventured into the mysteries of 

space. 

Neil Armstrong was an accomplished 

aerospace engineer, Navy pilot, astronaut, and the first man to walk on the 

Moon. Neil Armstrong will be forever 

immortalized as a brave and great explorer. 

Toward the end of his life, Neil Armstrong spoke frequently and passionately about the future of manned space 

flight. Neil Armstrong understood that 

American exceptionalism is in jeopardy and may be lost to future generations. 

As a member of the House Science, 

Space, and Technology Committee, I 

recently had the privilege to meet Neil 

Armstrong during a public hearing on 

NASA’s Space Launch System, the 

Orion Multipurpose Crew Vehicle, and 

America’s role in space. During that 

hearing, Neil Armstrong expressed concerns about the direction of America’s 

space program. 

Neil Armstrong testified, and I quote: 

The past year has been frustrating to 

NASA observers as they tried to understand 

NASA’s plans and progress. NASA leadership 

enthusiastically assured the American people that the agency was embarking on an exciting new age of discovery in the cosmos. 

But the realities of the termination of the 

shuttle program, the cancellation of existing 

rocket launcher and spacecraft programs, 

the layoffs of thousands of aerospace workers, and the outlook for American space activity throughout the next decade were difficult to reconcile with the agency assertions. 

Neil Armstrong continued, and again 

I quote: 

So, much has been accomplished. But 

NASA, hobbled by cumbrous limitations, has 

been unable to articulate a master plan that 

excites the imagination and provides a semblance of predictability to the aerospace industry. 

Neil Armstrong concluded by testifying, and again I quote: 

Predicting the future is inherently risky, 

but the proposed Space Launch System includes many proven and reliable components 

which suggest that its development could be 

relatively trouble free. If that proves to be 

so, it would bode well for exploration. 

In the midst of America’s current 

economic malaise and deficit-ridden 

Federal spending on programs that do 

nothing or little to advance technology 

or humanity’s condition, I share Neil 

Armstrong’s concern for the future of 

NASA and whether Washington has the 

inspirational leadership exhibited by 

President Kennedy in the 1960s, or ‘‘the 

right stuff’’ that is essential for space 

exploration. 

Today, American astronauts hitch a 

ride from Russia. Oh, how far we have 

fallen. Quite frankly, America and the 

human condition beg for the White 

House leadership once shown by President Kennedy, but which now is sorely 

lacking. 

Mr. Speaker, there is a whole universe out there waiting for us to explore. Just as America did in the 1960s, 

today’s Americans can accomplish 

what is seemingly impossible. All 

America lacks is the vision needed to 

help us understand where we should go 

and the leadership needed to get us 

there. 

Mr. Speaker, America will best honor 

the memory of Neil Armstrong and his 

achievements by striving for the American exceptionalism exemplified by 

Neil Armstrong in continuing his 

dream of manned space flight and exploration. 

f 

TAKE POLITICS OUT OF THE POST 

OFFICE 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

Chair recognizes the gentleman from 

Georgia (Mr. JOHNSON) for 5 minutes. 

Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to urge my colleagues 

in this do-nothing Congress to take 

politics out of the post office. 

The post office was explicitly authorized in article I, section 8, clause 7 of 

the United States Constitution. It 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE
September 13, 2012 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — HOUSE H5929 

began its operations on July 26, 1775, 

and Ben Franklin was appointed the 

first Postmaster General. That’s a long 

time ago. 

It has a legal obligation to serve everyone, regardless of geography, and at 

a uniform cost with uniform services. 

And it has exclusive access to boxes 

that are marked ‘‘U.S. Postal’’ or ‘‘U.S. 

Post Office.’’ And it also competes with 

private package delivery services. 

In 2006, Congress forced the United 

States Postal Service to pre-fund 100 

percent of retiree insurance premiums. 

No other company, public or private, is 

forced to comply with such an unnecessary and destructive policy. 

Mr. Speaker, House Republicans 

cited declining mail volumes and a 

growing labor force as the primary reasons why the 2006 legislation was necessary. Yet 2005, 2006, and 2007 were the 

highest volume years in U.S. Postal 

Service history. In fact, 2006 was the 

highest volume year ever. 

Mr. Speaker, the real motivation behind the 2006 legislation was to break 

the back of a public sector union and 

privatize the mailing industry. Why 

else would Congress alter an entity 

that hasn’t taken a dime of United 

States taxpayers’ money in 30 years? 

According to the Congressional Research Service, the U.S. Postal Service 

was self-supporting since 1971, using 

postage sales to fund operations. The 

Postal Service was so profitable that it 

returned money to the Treasury every 

single year, while providing free services to the visually impaired and persons overseas. 

If the Postal Service was a private 

corporation, or if it had been a private 

corporation at that time, my colleagues across the aisle would have 

hailed it as the model of economic success and sung its praises from sea to 

shining sea. 

Since the pre-funding mandate of 

2006, however, the Postal Service has 

nearly crumbled under the weight of 

its pension costs. How does an organization that had robust profits for 30 

years, leading up to the 2006 legislation, suddenly start running deficits 

and lose $25 billion between 2007 and 

2011? 

How did the U.S. Postal Service go 

from no debt in 2006 to over $13 billion 

in debt today? 

Many of my colleagues on the other 

side have well-connected friends who 

advocate for Postal Service privatization. I’m here to connect the dots for 

the American people. 

Instead of wasting time today, this 

do-nothing Congress should vote to 

stop the damage inflicted upon the 

United States Postal Service by passing H.R. 1351. This bipartisan postal reform bill protects the hardworking employees of the Postal Service. 

The U.S. Postal Service was not in 

danger of becoming insolvent until 

Congress decided to meddle in its affairs. It’s hypocritically inconsistent 

for my friends on the other side of the 

aisle to talk about government being 

the problem, while they don’t acknowledge that they created a big problem 

for the post office. It is hypocritical. 

Mr. Speaker, the Postal Service already missed a $5.5 billion payment in 

August. Congress must act before the 

post office defaults on another payment later this month. Instead of 

scheduling political votes that highlight our differences, let’s stop the 

madness and do what is in the best interest of the American people, the 

economy, and communities across the 

Nation. 

The Postal Service employs 700,000 of 

our fellow citizens, over 17,000 of whom 

are from my State of Georgia. 

b 1040 

One-third are military veterans who 

deliver 212 billion pieces of mail to over 

144 million locations. This is the middle class that’s doing this. If privatization advocates like the Koch brothers 

get their wish, the Postal Service will 

slowly be destroyed, causing good jobs 

to be lost and allowing companies to 

raise prices of delivery. Taking action 

to strengthen the Postal Service’s finances is not just good for the letter 

carriers and postmasters; it’s also good 

for business. There is $1.3 trillion in 

mailing industry proceeds out there 

that support 7 million private sector 

jobs. The time to act, ladies and gentlemen, is now. 

f 

HUNGER STRIKE UNDERWAY BY 

PRO-DEMOCRACY ACTIVISTS IN 

CUBA 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

Chair recognizes the gentleman from 

Florida (Mr. DIAZ-BALART) for 5 minutes. 

Mr. DIAZ-BALART. Mr. Speaker, 

just 90 miles away from the coast of 

the United States there exists a murderous, terrorist regime on the island 

of Cuba. It is a regime that harbors terrorists, that funds terrorism, that has 

even held an American hostage since 

the summer of ’09, and that denies all 

basic human rights to its people. 

Currently, 26 pro-democracy activists, it has been reported, have initiated a hunger strike. It started with 

Jorge Luis Garcia Perez Antunez on 

September 7 of 2012 in order to protest 

the brutal oppression by the Castro 

thugs against the Cuban people and 

against the political prisoners, and it 

has now been joined, as I said, by another 25. 

You’re not going to see that on the 

front pages of the newspapers. These 

are individuals who, for some reason, 

the press will not cover. The only thing 

you’ll see about the Castro regime is, 

frankly, the beauty of the beaches and 

the island and the fact that they have 

old cars—such a quaint thing. It’s not 

quaint when your human rights are 

violated and when you are forced to 

drive 50-year-old automobiles—if 

you’re lucky to even get one of those. 

Since these individuals, these heroes, 

are for some reason being denied the 

coverage that they deserve, I come to 

the floor to mention who they are— 

these heroes that we have to support, 

that we have to defend, and that we 

can never forget. So I am going to read 

their names. 

I mentioned Jorge Luis Garcia Perez 

Antunez. Jorge Vazquez Chaviano, 

Arturo Conde Zamora, Yerandi Martinez Rodriguez, Orlando Almenares 

Reyes, Luis Enrique Ponce Sanchez, 

Roberley Villalobos Torres, Israel Robert Isaac, Yuniel Alvarez Garcia, Luis 

Enrique Santos Caballero, Yosmel Martinez Corcho, Alberto Reyes Morales, 

Marta Beatriz Roque Cabello—by the 

way, who is a very well-known pro-democracy leader of Cuba and whose 

health is, frankly, in poor shape—Omar 

Pedroso Suarez, Yadira Rodriguez 

Bombino, Ibis Maria Rodriguez Gonzalez, Fermin Zamora Vazquez, 

Yasmani Nicle Abad, Leonardo Cancio 

Santana, Pedro Fernandez Vega Cortes, 

Arcelio Lopez Rojas, Misahel Valdes 

Diaz, and Jorge Luis Recio Arias. 

These heroes, these pro-democracy 

activists and heroes, have stood up and 

are standing up to the Castro dictatorship with whatever they have, including their health and their bodies. They 

need our prayers. They need our support. They need our solidarity at this 

pivotal time in their struggle for 

Cuba’s freedom. 

Mr. Speaker, may God protect these 

brave heroes. May the international 

community demonstrate the solidarity 

that they deserve—and yes, we here in 

the United States Congress and in this 

country must continue to work to do 

what we can to help them and others 

achieve their final day of freedom. 

f 

THE FUTURE LEADERSHIP OF 

CONGRESS AND THE COUNTRY 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

Chair recognizes the gentleman from 

Vermont (Mr. WELCH) for 5 minutes. 

Mr. WELCH. Mr. Speaker, the American people are going to make a decision on November 6 about the future 

leadership of this Congress and this 

country, and they face, as they do 

every 4 years, two fundamental questions. The first: Who can be in charge 

of the cash register? Who will best 

manage the economy? The second: Who 

will be a firm hand in protecting America’s foreign policy interests? If we 

look at the past 2 years with this Republican-led Congress, which has accomplished nothing and, in fact, has 

done damage, the question on who is 

best in charge of the cash register is 

quite clear. 

The Ryan budget that was passed by 

this House and that stalled in the Senate would actually increase the debt. 

The whole point, supposedly, of the Republican agenda coming into Congress 

was to lower the debt. The budget they 

passed would increase it by $6 trillion. 

Why is that? Well, first of all, many of 

the proponents of this budget are the 

folks who voted for policies that actually exploded the debt: the war in Iraq 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with HOUSE