Congressional Record UNUM

E PLURIBUS

United States

of America PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 111th

 CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION

b This symbol represents the time of day during the House proceedings, e.g., b 1407 is 2:07 p.m.

Matter set in this typeface indicates words inserted or appended, rather than spoken, by a Member of the House on the floor.

.

H165 

Vol. 155 WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, JANUARY 13, 2009 No. 7 

House of Representatives 

The House met at 12:30 p.m. and was 

called to order by the Speaker pro tempore (Ms. EDWARDS

f 

of Maryland). 

DESIGNATION OF THE SPEAKER 

PRO TEMPORE 

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid before the House the following communication from the Speaker: 

WASHINGTON, DC, 

January 13, 2009. 

I hereby appoint the Honorable DONNA F. 

EDWARDS to act as Speaker pro tempore on 

this day. 

NANCY PELOSI, 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

f 

MORNING-HOUR DEBATE 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the order of the House of January 6, 2009, the Chair will now recognize Members from lists submitted by 

the majority and minority leaders for 

morning-hour debate. 

The Chair will alternate recognition 

between the parties, with each party 

limited to 30 minutes and each Member 

other than the majority and minority 

leaders and the minority whip limited 

to 5 minutes. 

f 

A NEW DIRECTION FOR AMERICA’S 

ECONOMIC FUTURE 

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The 

Chair recognizes the gentleman from 

Oregon (Mr. DEFAZIO) for 5 minutes. 

Mr. DEFAZIO. Madam Speaker, I 

congratulate the President-elect on 

being in touch with the American people in understanding the pain on Wall 

Street, of job losses, of foreclosures, 

and of the sense of urgency. I share the 

sense of urgency he brings to this issue 

and the idea that we need a significant 

new investment—stimulus, whatever 

you want to call it—in America to turn 

things around. That’s the good news. 

The bad news is I don’t believe he is 

well served by his economic advisers. 

These are your typical pointy-headed, 

academic economists who think that 

what we need is to return to a speculative, consumer-driven society, not a 

wealth-oriented, production-driven society with a strong foundation. They 

want instant gratification with five 

times as much in tax cuts as investment in infrastructure in this country, 

a country with a $1.6 trillion infrastructure deficit—a crumbling water 

system, sewer systems, roads, bridges. 

One hundred sixty thousand bridges 

in this country on the National Highway System, let alone the local, are 

structurally deficient or are functionally obsolete. Our transit systems are 

operating with obsolescent or obsolete 

equipment. Now, the investments in 

these areas aren’t all shovel-ready. 

They’re going to drop this shovel-ready 

60 days, going to be done in 18 months. 

We are in deep trouble in this country, 

and rebuilding the foundation and the 

underpinnings of this economy is going 

to be critical toward a long-term recovery effort. When you invest in these 

things, you put people to work. These 

are much better than tax cuts. 

Now, you don’t have to take it from 

me. Yes, he has his economic advisers— 

Mr. Summers and others—but I would 

rather take advice from Paul Krugman, 

who just got the Nobel Prize for Economics. 

He says, ‘‘And bear in mind that even 

a project that delivers its main punch 

in, say, 2011 can provide significant 

economic support in earlier years. If 

Mr. Obama drops the ‘jump-start’ metaphor, if he accepts the reality that we 

need a multi-year program rather than 

a short burst of activity, he can create 

a lot more jobs through government investment even in the near term.’’ 

He goes on to say, ‘‘So my advice to 

the Obama team is to scrap the business tax cuts and, more important, to 

deal with the threat of doing too little 

by doing more, and the way to do more 

is to stop talking about jump-starts 

and look more broadly at the possibilities for government investment.’’ 

How about a national high-speed rail 

network? That would take decades. It 

would cost hundreds of billions of dollars, but it would build a future for 

America. The emergencies would be 

built here. The cars would be built 

here. The tracks would be built here. 

It’s so much more fuel-efficient than 

our current modes of transportation. 

How about our existing transit system—the 12,000 obsolete buses or the 

need for new streetcar systems? These 

projects, yes, can’t be going in 60 or in 

90 days. Well, a few of them actually 

can. In fact, we have a list on the 

Transportation and Infrastructure 

Committee from both local and State 

and national groups that totals a couple hundred billion dollars. Yet Mr. 

Summers poo-poos the idea that there 

is an adequate amount of investment 

that can be begun and made in the 

short term, and he’d rather send it out 

in checks of about $8 per pay period to 

Americans. 

I don’t think the people I represent 

believe that, if they get an extra $8 

take home that that’s building a 

strong, new foundation, giving them 

confidence in the future of this economy, and I certainly don’t believe that 

banks should be able to recapture taxes 

they paid in the past because they’ve 

speculated themselves to the verge of 

insolvency, taking money from the 

taxpayers that they won’t tell us how 

they’ve billed. Now they want to get a 

look-back on their taxes. That’s not 

going to put one single person to work. 

It might give some CEO yet another 

bonus, but it’s not going to put anybody to work. 

Let’s have a much more realistic, 

concrete, if you will, investment in 

America’s future rather than more of 

the same. The huge amount of tax cuts 

in this proposal sound a little bit too 

much like the George Bush trickledown economy. It’s time for a new direction to rebuild the foundations of 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with HOUSE