Dan Burton

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. You know, I think my colleagues have very eloquently explained the contents of the bill and what we need to do. But the thing I would like to talk about for a minute or two are the ramifications for America and the rest of the world if we don't do something. We get about 30 to 40 percent of our energy from the Middle East, and if I were talking to the American people, I would just say to them that if you look at your lights and you look at the energy you need for your car and for everything else, heating your house, you need to realize that if Iran develops a nuclear capability and that whole area becomes a war zone, the Persian Gulf, where a lot of oil is transported through, we would see a terrible problem as far as our energy is concerned, and that would directly affect our economy. So it is extremely important that we do something and do something very, very quickly. We have waited too long. We have been talking about negotiating with Iran and putting sanctions on them for the past 4 or 5 years, trying to get our allies to work with us. The fact of the matter is nothing has happened, and Iran continues to thumb their nose at the rest of the world. This is a terrible, terrible threat. A terrorist state, Iran, with nuclear weapons is not only a threat to the Middle East, to Israel, our best ally over there, but it is a threat to every single one of us. They are also working on intermediate range missiles and possibly intercontinental ballistic missiles. If they get those, nobody is safe. So it is extremely important that we take whatever measures are necessary to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. Now, today we are taking a great first step. I hope when this goes to conference committee we come out with something that is so strong it really will have an impact on what Iran does. But if it doesn't, it is important that everybody in the world realize that we have to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons because it is a threat to every single person on this planet in one way or another. We have got to stop nuclear proliferation, but the first thing we have to do is stop Iran, a terrorist state, from getting nuclear weapons. I thank the gentlelady for yielding.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, tonight I was going to talk about the health care bill, and how it's going to affect AT&T, $1 billion they are going to be out; John Deere, 150 million; Caterpillar, 100 million; Prudential a 100 million. All these companies, their bottom line is going to be reduced by all this money because of the health care bill that wasn't supposed to hurt our economy at all. But it's going to. It's going to hurt the bottom line of all these companies, and it's going to affect the people who work for them. They are going to be laying people off. They are going to be offshore many of these companies because of this. And it's something that wasn't talked about during the health care debate. The American people were against the bill. And if they knew this, they would really be against the bill. But the thing I want to talk about tonight is my good friend, Congressman Poe, was just down here. And usually when I come down here to give a talk at night, I have a subject like this I am going to talk about, but he said some things during his 5-minute Special Order that I wish all of my colleagues who may be watching back in their offices, and if I were talking to the American people, I would wish that they could hear what he had to say. Mr. Poe, did I understand you correctly when you said that there is a bounty of $250,000 on our Border Patrol agents down there by the drug cartels?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I wasn't aware of that. And I doubt if any of our colleagues were aware of that. Are the sheriffs and all the law enforcement agencies down there, they are aware of it as well?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Who in the world would want to be a Border Patrol agent or work on that border if they know that there is a $250,000 bounty on their head by the drug cartels?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. And you showed a helicopter, a Mexican helicopter that was in the United States airspace. And there is no explanation for that as well.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. And no American troops, National Guard or military of any kind is down there augmenting the border patrol agents that are risking their lives every day.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Well, you know, what I would like to do, Representative Poe, under your leadership, I'd like to work with you to get a letter signed to the President of the United States talking about this bounty that's on our border patrol agents' heads, and ask him and the Governors of those States to do whatever is necessary to protect that border and to make sure that our border patrol agents aren't at risk like they are today. That's just terrible. I can't believe that. And if we could get a bunch of Members to sign a letter like that, maybe we could wake up the administration to the problem and get some additional help down there because, as you know, well, you of all people know, they're coming across in droves and they're using all kinds of methods to bring drugs into this country. And they're killing Americans. Wasn't there an American killed a couple of miles inside the border just a week or two ago?

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Well, I will be glad to work with you, if you would like to, to draft a letter to make sure that everybody knows in this body and the President knows that there is a bounty to kill American border patrol agents or to kidnap them and do whatever they do to them by the drug cartels. This is something that the American people need to know about. And I'm so happy that you brought this up tonight, and I'm going to do everything I can to work with you to make sure we do something to stop it. And I want to go down to the border with you to see this thing firsthand, and we'll be doing that pretty quick.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Everybody in this body owes you a debt of gratitude.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, it's the end of the week. Another week has gone by, and the Middle East continues to be a tinderbox waiting to explode. Abraham Lincoln said, ``Let the people know the facts and the country will be saved.'' And one of the things that bothers me is it's hard for us to get the facts sometimes. The President of the United States, Mr. Obama, this week had a summit that was supposed to deal with nuclear proliferation. And they had leaders from all over the world there, and they were talking about how to stop the proliferation of nuclear weapons from getting into countries that may cause a problem and weapons that might get into terrorists' hands that could destroy an awful lot of the human race. But he didn't talk about Iran. It almost never happens anymore. He doesn't talk about Iran. They say that there are going to be sanctions put on Iran that's going to stop them from developing their nuclear weapons program, but the sanctions never take place. We have been talking about sanctions, I know, now for at least 5 or 6 years, and Iran just keeps thumbing their nose at the rest of the world, the United Nations, the United States, and everybody, and they continue to build a nuclear weapons program. They say they're not, but they are, and I think everybody in the world knows it. Now, this week, the head of the Iranian Nuclear Commission--I think that's the title he has--said that the Bushehr nuclear power plant will be operational in just a couple of months, the production of nuclear fissionable material within a couple of months. And our military leaders say that Iran could have a nuclear weapon in as little as 1 year, and some people say a lot quicker than that. Yet instead of doing something about it, we continue to fool around talking about putting sanctions on them week after week, month after month, year after year, and they continue to build a nuclear weapons program. And when the head of Israel comes here, Mr. Netanyahu, the Prime Minister. The President gives him the cold shoulder and starts telling him if he doesn't do certain things that we're not going to be supporting them, as we should be. And I think that's terrible. Our only real strong ally in the Middle East that has been with us through thick and thin is Israel, and we should be supporting them right now and doing everything we can to keep the Middle East from going up in smoke. Because if Iran gets a nuclear weapon, there's no question in my mind that they'll use it if they get an opportunity. Because Mr. Ahmadinejad, the President of Iran, continues to say he wants, as his number one objective, to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. And I can tell you right now if I know Bibi Netanyahu, and I think I do, he's not going to let that happen. So because we are fooling around, we are still dealing with the possibility of a major conflagration over there. Now, how does that affect the Middle East? Well, Israel is in jeopardy, but if Iran gets nuclear weapons and we don't do something about it and Israel doesn't, then all those countries around there are going to be intimidated, and they are all going to start moving toward radical Islam. That's my view, anyhow. And that is something we can't allow to happen. We can't allow that whole area to go down that road. But in addition to that, we get about 30 percent or 40 percent of our energy from the Middle East, and if that happens, we are going to have trouble getting the oil that we need to keep our lights on, to keep the gasoline in our cars, and all the other things that we do with energy. So I would just like to say that, instead of holding these conferences, if I were talking to him, Mr. President, and I know I can't, but if I were, I would say quit fooling around. Get with the program. Let Ahmadinejad and the Iranians know that we are not going to stand by and let them become a nuclear power with nuclear weapons. Because if they do, if they continue down that path, we along with Israel will do whatever is necessary to stop them. They need to know that. As long as they know we're just talking and pushing papers around and talking about sanctions, they are not going to stop. They are only going to stop when they know we mean business. And, Mr. President, you are sure not giving them the right signal, in my opinion.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Let me just say that I am a great admirer of Duke University. I lean a little more toward Butler since I'm from Indianapolis, Indiana, and I thought Duke played a great game. And I want you to know, there is no truth to the rumor that Butler intentionally missed that last basketball shot because they didn't want to hurt Duke's feelings. Are you listening over there? Anyhow, congratulations to Duke University and to Butler University. Butler is a very small school. It's a private school in Indianapolis, and for them to reach the final game in the national championship is a real tribute not only to the school and the players but to a great young coach who's only been coaching for 3 years. And of course the Duke Blue Devils are always tough, and I'm very proud to say we want to congratulate them. But the Bulldogs did a great job. They were a great team, and next year we're going to get them.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. You know, Mr. Speaker, I get a big kick out of my Democrat colleagues talking about how they are doing so much for the poor and underprivileged in this country and giving all these tax cuts. The fact of the matter is the tax cuts that were passed by the previous administration are going to expire at the end of this year and the Democrats are going to let them expire, which means that in effect all those taxes are going to go up. That is a tax increase. Mr. Volcker, who was in the Carter administration and raised interest rates to 21\1/2\ percent that put this country into a real economic spiral, he is now saying that we are going to need a VAT tax, a value- added tax of about 15 to 20 percent, which they are going to probably try to push through after the election. And a VAT tax of 20 percent would mean if you buy a $10,000 car it is going to cost you $12,000 because you have a $2,000 additional tax tacked on. This is a tax and spend administration. We have the biggest deficits in the history of the United States. And when I hear my colleagues talking about all the good things they are doing for America, I wish they would look at the unemployment rate and look at what people are taking out of their salaries and what this country is going through economically. It ain't what they are saying.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I was in my office today, Mr. Speaker, and I was watching the Joint Economic Committee. And one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle was talking about how one of his companies had 300 employees that were in entry level positions and they were getting minimum wage and the employer was telling him how they were going to have to lay a lot of them off because of the inability of them to get loans and for other reasons. The reason I came down to talk about this is because there is no question that if we have a tight money policy that it's going to affect small businesses. In addition to that, when we load additional regulations and costs onto small businesses, it's going to cause them problems and they are going to have to lay people off. I was reading in the paper this week the new health care bill is going to cost AT&T $1 billion. They are going to have to take that out of their bottom line. It's going to cost the John Deere & Company $150 million; Caterpillar, $100 million; Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing, $90 million; AK Steel, $31 million; Valero Energy, $20 million. All of these companies are going to pay for that, and they are either going to have to take it out of their profits or they are going to have to take it out of the hides of their employees by letting some of them go or they will have to send some of their operations offshore. As long as we have more government and more government programs, it's going to cost jobs. Because somebody has to pay for those. The money doesn't come out of the sky. So if an employer gets a regulation that costs him money, if an employer is taxed and it's going to cost him money, then he has to find someplace to get that money in order to have a bottom-line profit, unless you believe the government should run everything and we should have socialism in this country or a socialized economy. And some people think that's where we are headed, and I think that is very unfortunate. But let's just take a look at some of the things that the administration has done since they have taken office that have been a burden to small business and has cost us jobs. Incidentally, I would just like to say that all the great programs and plans that the Obama administration had was supposed to keep unemployment below 8 percent, and it's still around 9\1/2\ to 10 percent and there is no indication it is going to go down. But, anyhow, the Economic Stabilization Act, which part of it was this year and part of it was last year, in 2008, so we can't blame all of that on Obama, but the TARP bailout was $700 billion. And then in January we had $73.3 billion in the State Children's Health Insurance reauthorization, a worthy program, but it costs a lot of money. The stimulus bill was $1.16 trillion when you add in the interest, money we don't have. In February, we had the omnibus spending bill, which was $625 billion when you add in interest. In June, $105.9 billion in the supplemental. Last year we had the consolidated appropriations mini omnibus bill of $3.55 trillion, again money we don't have. And then in March of this year, we had the health care bill, which was estimated to cost, if you talk about 10 years of taxes and 10 years of coverage, about $3 trillion or $2.5 to $3 trillion. You load all this on the back of small business, and there's no way that you can continue to keep everybody employed. You're going to tax them. Mr. Waxman, the chairman of the Commerce Committee, is bringing before his committee the CEOs of AT&T, Deere & Company, Caterpillar, because he says they really shouldn't be telling people these things because these aren't accurate figures. Well, they are accurate figures: the $1 billion it is going to cost AT&T, the $150 million it is going to cost John Deere & Company, the $100 million it is going to cost Caterpillar, and on and on. They have to report that by law, and because they have reported it, Mr. Waxman wants them to come before the committee to try to make them look like they are blowing these figures up. The fact of the matter is business and industry in this country is suffering and because of that we're going to see more unemployment. Now, you add to that by the end of this year the tax cuts that were put in by the previous administration are going to expire, and the President has said he's going to let them expire, which means those tax cuts are not going to be there. So that again will, in effect, be a tax increase. And then you add to that Mr. Volker, as I said in my previous 1 minute, is talking about a value-added tax of about 15 to 20 percent. That's going to be a terrible thing for the economy and for jobs. So I would like to say to my colleagues, if you want to create jobs, cut taxes and cut spending. That's the answer. And cut government regulation.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, a lot of people in this country thought that the health care bill was a move toward socialism, toward government control over the entire health care industry. But, you know, we went ahead and passed it anyhow, even though probably 60-some percent of the American people opposed it. But I just want to say tonight to my Democratic colleagues who pushed so hard for it, who said it wasn't a move toward government control and socialism, there is one foreign leader who really thinks it was a great move in the right direction, and that is the Communist leader from Cuba, Fidel Castro, who contacted the President of the United States and said it was a giant step in the right direction. That ought to tell us something.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor 21 young Hoosiers who are currently serving our country overseas as members of the Peace Corps. The Peace Corps was an initiative started by President John F. Kennedy. It was established by Executive Order 1924 on March 1, 1961, and later authorized by Congress on September 22, 1961, through passage of the Peace Corps Act (Public Law 87-293). The Peace Corps Act declares the purpose of the Peace Corps to be: To promote world peace and friendship through a Peace Corps, which shall make available to interested countries and areas men and women of the United States qualified for service abroad and willing to serve, under conditions of hardship if necessary, to help the peoples of such countries and areas in meeting their needs for trained manpower. The Peace Corps has pursued its legislative mandate of promoting world peace and friendship by sending volunteers to serve at the grassroots level in villages and towns in across the globe. Living and working with ordinary people, Peace Corps volunteers have offered their expertise in a variety of areas--such as teachers, environmental specialists, health promoters, and small business advisers--to help improve the lives of those they work with and in turn help them better understand the American people and American culture. To date, nearly 200,000 Peace Corps volunteers have served in 139 countries; and about 7,671 volunteers are currently serving in 76 nations. Beginning this spring, for the first time, Peace Corps volunteers will serve in Indonesia working as English teachers in high schools and at teacher training institutions. Later in the year, the Peace Corps will return to Sierra Leone after a 16-year absence and focus on secondary education and work with their host communities on grassroots initiatives and community developments. The first week in March has traditionally been set aside to honor the history and accomplishments of the Peace Corps. This year's festivities took place March 1, 2010 through March 7, 2010 and commemorated the 49th anniversary of the Peace Corps. Madami Speaker, the Peace Corps is perhaps our country's most important public diplomacy programs. The sight of ordinary Americans volunteering to serve the world's most disadvantaged populations has never failed to elevate good will toward our country. I ask unanimous consent to include in the Congressional Record the names of the 21 Hoosiers from my District who are currently serving their tours with the Peace Corps in countries ranging from Ukraine and Moldova in Europe, to Botswana, Tanzania, and Zambia in Africa, to Guatemala and Costa Rica in Central America. I ask all of my colleagues to join me in honoring these outstanding young men and women and in wishing them well in their endeavors.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, I rise tonight to encourage my colleagues to support H.R. 2122, a bill introduced by our colleague Delegate Pierluisi to ensure that the cover-over tax levied on the rum exports from Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands are used for their original intended purpose; namely to promote the general welfare of the territories' citizens in addition to promoting overall economic development. Currently, the funds are being used, in my opinion, to unfairly support blatant corporate welfare for a foreign-owned company. We do not need to be sending our tax dollars to foreign corporations when we have record unemployment in this country. Rum that is produced in either Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands, and that is sold in the continental United States, is subject to the same Federal tax as rum produced in the States--roughly $13.50 for each proof-gallon. However, in the case of the territories, the majority of the revenue is returned by the Federal government to the respective territory, and then the remainder is retained by the Federal government. This so-called ``cover-over'' tax provision--which has enjoyed strong bi-partisan support for many years--allows the territories to pay for important local programs. Unfortunately, this provision is now being abused to award a sweetheart deal to the British alcohol distiller and importer Diageo. Under the terms of this sweetheart deal, London-based Diageo will receive 46 percent of the U.S. Virgin Islands' cover-over to pay for a new distillery. Madam Speaker, Diageo is worth roughly $35 billion according to the latest figures. To give Diageo 46 percent of the funds intended for the general welfare of the people of the Virgin Islands, in my opinion, violates the spirit if not the letter of the law. If this type of manipulation is allowed, many experts believe, a race to the bottom will result, with the territories attempting to poach businesses from each other with larger and larger sweet-heart deals paid for by the cover-over funds. For example, Puerto Rico currently receives about $400 million in carry-over funds per year. From that pool of money, Puerto Rico pays about six percent to the company, Rums of Puerto Rico, and Puerto Rican law states that no more than 10 percent of the funds it receives from the rum cover-over program can be used to subsidize rum producers on the island. This is a reasonable approach. It ensures that Puerto Rico can attract businesses to the island while still having the resources to carry out public works projects. H.R. 2122 carries forward this common-sense approach. Under the terms of the bill, either Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands may use its cover-over funds to provide unfair subsidies to rum producers. Further, if it is determined by the Secretary of the Treasury that a territory has unfairly subsidized a rum producer, the Secretary can transfer some of the cover-over funds intended for that territory that provided the unfair subsidy to the territory that has been disadvantaged. The legislation defines ``unfair'' or ``per se unreasonable'' if the subsidy exceeds ten percent of the covered-over amount returned to the territory's treasury. Madam Speaker, let us remember the original intent of the cover-over funds, which was to help the territories fund important civil programs for the benefit of the people of Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands. The purpose was most certainly not to provide corporate welfare to large foreign-owned conglomerates. H.R. 2122 will ensure that the original purpose of the cover-over tax--to advance the general welfare of the citizens--is being carried out. I urge my colleagues to support this common-sense bill.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. I thank the gentleman for yielding. My wife's a doctor, and she and a lot of her colleagues have been talking, and they have seen these statistics that show that almost half of the doctors say they will leave their practices if this bill becomes law. Now let's just say that only 10 percent of that is accurate. That would be 5 percent of the doctors. And with 32 million people that you are adding to the rolls, how in the world can you say that you are going to save a trillion dollars over the next couple of decades? I mean, come on, nobody in America is going to believe that. You are adding 32 million people, you are going to have fewer doctors, and we are already short on doctors, and the cost is going to go down, and you are going to save money, and you are going to save a trillion dollars. Nobody in America believes it. And Medicaid, in the State of Indiana, we are going to pick up 500,000 new people on Medicaid, and you are going to shift the burden to Indiana for 500,000 people? It's going to cost an arm and a leg. We are going to have to raise taxes there. You are going to have to end up raising a lot of taxes here. There is no question about it. You can't do what you say you are going to do, and the American people know it.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. First of all, let me say to my colleague who just spoke, we all abhor racial epithets and we all abhor prejudice, but one of the things that concerns me is that we have an awful lot of people who are upset about what is going on here in Washington, the Tea Party people and others, who really feel like they're not being listened to by the Congress of the United States. I don't want to see them tarred by the same brush as a few people who got out of line. Obviously, we hate racial prejudice or anybody that says things like we've heard have been said, but all the people who are fighting against what's been taking place here and legislation like this national health care bill, they should not be condemned for coming to Washington and fighting for what they believe in because a few people got out of order. Obviously, we're concerned about people that say those things, and they shouldn't be saying those. They should be condemned. But we should listen to the people who are here who are fighting for their rights and the things they believe in as far as health care is concerned. They don't want the government coming between them and their doctor. They don't want socialized medicine. And that's why they were out here. If a few got out of order, they should be condemned. But we should not tar all the people in this country--over 60 percent who didn't want that bill passed--with the same brush, and sometimes I think that's what's happening. But that's not why I came down here tonight. I was just responding to my colleague who just spoke, who's a very good friend of mine. What I came down here to talk about was the shabby treatment that Benjamin Netanyahu from Israel has gotten when he has been here twice now to visit with the President. We met with Bibi Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel, this week, the Foreign Affairs Committee on which I serve, and we talked to him about the threat of Iran, which is a threat not only to Israel and the Middle East, but it's a threat to the entire world. We get about 30 or 40 percent of our energy from the Middle East, and if that goes up in smoke because of the war, we're going to suffer economically because we are not energy independent. One of my colleagues was down here talking about not being able to drill offshore or in the ANWR to move toward energy independence, and we're not. We're still dependent on the Middle East and South America and Mr. Chavez and Venezuela, people that don't like us at all; yet, we still depend on them and we're not moving toward energy independence. So what happens if Israel is forced into doing something about Iran and a war breaks out in that whole area? The whole world will suffer and we will suffer economically because we won't have the energy with which to run our country and our economy. So this is very important. Now, when the President meets with Bibi Netanyahu, it's obvious by his body language and the way he treats the Prime Minister of Israel that he doesn't agree with him on Israel's goals to preserve and protect their country. And that's not the way it should be, because right now Iran is not only trying to develop a nuclear weapon--and we think they're very close--but they're also trying to develop a delivery system that will not only hit targets in the Middle East like Israel, but targets in parts of Europe. And they're trying to develop an intercontinental ballistic missile that could hit parts of the United States. And if Iran gets nuclear weapons, all those countries around them are going to want to have nuclear weapons and this world is going to be put on the precipice of a nuclear holocaust that nobody wants. This isn't baloney folks. This is what's really going to happen, Mr. Speaker. So we need to do everything we can to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons. They are a terrorist state that has waged war along with al Qaeda and the Taliban against us and our freedoms and against Israel as well. We need to do everything we can to make sure that they do not succeed. Those people are terrorists, and we're at war against terrorism. And so we have to be absolutely committed to stopping them from developing that nuclear capability, and that means we have to work with Israel, our only really strong ally in the Middle East, who wants to do something about this. Bibi Netanyahu knows what's at stake. The millions of lives of Israelis that are there will be the first target, and they will be blown up and attacked if Iran gets nuclear weapons. And Israel's going to have to take action. If they take action by themselves, it could be a catastrophic situation. They need our help, and the President of the United States should know that the majority of this Congress supports Israel's right to exist and supports them in their effort to stop Iran from developing nuclear capabilities. So, if the President were listening tonight, I would say this to him, Mr. Speaker: Mr. President, listen. The majority of both the House and the Senate supports giving Israel the ability to defend itself and to defend our interests in the Middle East, to work with us to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons that will threaten not only the Middle East, but the entire world. I think, Mr. President, you ought to go out on the lawn of the White House and declare your support for Israel, their right to exist, their right to survive, and that we're with them to stop Iran from developing nuclear capability.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, I'm not going to talk for 5 minutes, but I would like to talk to my Democratic colleagues tonight because once again it seems that we're spending money that we don't have. And I know this may sound funny, but the American people can't figure out why they have to balance their budgets and we keep spending money we don't have, we don't have, we don't have. Now, the bill we passed today provided $6 million in funds that we did appropriate money for, for use for summer jobs, and we had $5.1 billion for disaster relief. Well, now, disaster relief is something that I think is very laudable. But we have had the President say a number of times he is for what's called PAYGO, and if you come up with a program and don't have the money, you have to come up with the money by cutting another program to take care of the one that you're funding. So we had another $5.1 billion added to the deficit today. The deficit projected by the White House over the next 10 years is $900 billion a year. And they've been short on their projections all over the place. For instance, they said that the health care bill we just passed--which most Americans don't want--was only going to cost about $800-and-some billion. But, when you realize that we're paying for 6 years of benefits but we're taxing for 10 years, you realize that it's going to cost way more than the $800-and-some billion they're talking about. It's going to cost like $1.6 trillion or $1.7 trillion for 10 years of coverage or 10 years of taxes. So I would just like to say to my colleagues tonight and my colleagues back in the office--and if I were talking to the American people, if they were listening, if I could talk to them--I know I can't, Madam Speaker----I would say what we need to be doing in Washington is we need to be telling the President and the Democrat leadership to go down and buy several thousand reams of additional paper and several million gallons of ink so that they can go down to the printing press at the Treasury Department and print money that we don't have. That is what they ought to be doing. And then the people who have money in the bank, let's say you got a thousand dollars in the bank, Madam Speaker, and we double the money supplied by printing money that we don't have, we double the money supply, you have a thousand in the bank. You still have a thousand dollars but it will only buy $500 worth of product. That is where we're heading. Inflation is a hidden tax that people don't even realize they're getting. And that's what's going to happen if we don't get control of spending. The budget this year was $3.85 trillion that we don't have. The health care bill is going to cost more like $3 trillion in the next 10 years that we don't have. That doesn't include the doc fix, which is going to cost $250-some billion dollars that we don't have. So I would just like to say, Madam Speaker, to my colleagues back in their offices and to the American people if I could talk to them, and I know I can't, you ought to talk to your representative and tell them, quit spending money we don't have. You're ruining our children's future. You're creating a society that is going to be costing them a lot more, taxing them a lot more and giving them a quality of life that does not equal what we have today. And that is a terrible legacy to leave to the future generations.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to this flawed health care bill. Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Madam Speaker, I rise tonight to congratulate Kazakhstan for its new role as chair of the Organization for the Security and Co-operation of Europe, OSCE, and to let this serve as a reminder to the world that emerging democracies do in fact have an important and pivotal role to play on the global stage. As we approach the 35th anniversary of the signing of the Helsinki accords, a historic declaration by OSCE member states seeking to improve relations and foster dialogue between the West and the communist countries of the time, it seems duly appropriate to recognize the importance of Kazakhstan's new chairmanship since it is the first former Soviet state, the first CIS member, and the first central Asian country to assume such a role in the 56-member organization. This past September, I commended Kazakhstan's President Nazarbayev for almost 20 years of vision and leadership in transforming the former Soviet republic into an emerging and thriving democratic society. The unanimous endorsement by all OSCE member states for the chairmanship by Kazakhstan only reinforces these enormous and positive steps forward by this young democracy from its former Soviet roots. As a result, Kazakhstan and its neighbors have seen progress in regional security as Astana has emerged as both a regional and global leader on the non-proliferation and disarmament front, and its citizens have seen vast improvements to their daily lives as their country emerges as a regional economic leader. Furthermore, Kazakhstan has established itself as a strong ally and strategic partner to the United States fighting the global war on terror and especially playing an active role to ensure stability and security in Afghanistan. As one of its first acts as a society free from Soviet rule, President Nazarbayev positioned Kazakhstan to be a leader in nonproliferation by shutting down the Semipalatinsk nuclear test site, dismantling its nuclear and missile arsenal, which was the world's fourth largest at the time, and safely getting rid of, according to the president himself, 104 intercontinental missiles from the Soviet Union that were each tipped with 10 nuclear warheads. This was not an easy decision considering the potential influence that such an arsenal could yield both in the region and the globe, but the President has focused his country's efforts on building a ``new economic and political model'' that would strengthen its commercial and security relationships with the West. As a result, Kazakhstan has emerged as a regional economic leader, increasing its GDP to $135 billion--six times greater than its $22 billion GDP 10 years ago--in addition to increasing its foreign trade to more than $80 billion. These economic strides and the increase in economic opportunities stand in stark contrast to life under communist rule and are enough to mirror similar opportunities in many western countries, which is no small feat in so little time. Kazakhstan has also been a reliable ally to the United States, and President Nazarbayev has indicated that he looks forward to strengthening this relationship in addition to reinvigorating the OSCE. Proving his effectiveness and determination to tackle even the toughest of challenges, President Nazarbayev welcomes his country's new undertaking with the same gusto and leadership that helped him transform his country into the promising democracy and economic leader that it is today. Alluding to the many global challenges we face today, he issued a call to action to the member states, urging them to convene in a summit this year, for the first time in 10 years, in order to strengthen the role of the OSCE as we face ``one of the most complicated periods in modern history.'' One of the main issues he hopes to address and strengthen within the OSCE by holding this summit would be security matters and fighting terrorism. Accordingly, eliminating the terrorist presence and threat in Afghanistan is a matter of high priority that will not only benefit the region but will also have long-term positive implications for our own national security and international security. The Kazakh president asserted that ``it is a time when leaders of OSCE member states should demonstrate their political will and outline solutions to the difficult challenges facing our nations. The summit will not only give a powerful impetus to adapting the OSCE to modern challenges and threats, but also increase the confidence and respect among our peoples to the organization itself.'' Madam Speaker and fellow colleagues, I once again commend President Nazarbayev for his steadfast vision and leadership and urge you today to support him as he sets out to reestablish dialogue among all OSCE member states by convening a summit this year. Such an assembly can only foster cooperation that will ultimately lead to increased security and stability for all.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I get a big kick out of my Democrat colleagues as they join hands and run towards the edge of the political cliff to commit political suicide. It is very interesting. You know, they just don't get it. But the American people do. This sign, I want to make sure they understood. Americans get it. Listen to the people. But they aren't getting it. Today on television, just to make my point, the treasurer of the State of Massachusetts, a Democrat, said that their State-run health care plan is bankrupting their State. And my colleagues over here, who are on the precipice of committing political suicide, want to do it nationally and spend trillions of dollars that we don't have. So I would just like to say to those who haven't made up their mind, take a good look at Massachusetts. They are going bankrupt because of what you want to do.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Well, here we are, folks, Friday night. People are going to the movies, having dinner with their kids and grandkids, and we're here in the Capitol of the United States trying to screw up everybody's life. Let me just give you a little information we found today. Mr. Speaker, 46 percent of the primary care doctors in this country said if this bill passes, they'll leave medicine. Now think about that. Let's just say that that's off by 75 percent. Let's say only a fourth of that happens, and we only have, say, 10 or 15 percent of the doctors leave primary care because of this bill. What do you think that's going to do to the patients? We're going to have more patients, according to this bill, because they're going to bring in more people, maybe some illegal aliens and people that aren't completely covered right now. So we're going to have fewer doctors and more patients. What is that going to result in? It's going to result in what we've all been talking about for a long time, and that is rationing of health care because you won't be able to take care of all these people. You have to pick and choose. It's going to cost more, and there's going to be long waiting lines like they have in other countries that have socialized medicine. I just can't hardly believe that we're doing this. You know, in Massachusetts, today I watched on television the Democrat treasurer of Massachusetts said on television just a couple of hours ago that their State is going to go bankrupt because of their public health program, which parallels what they want to do here in Washington. I mean, think about that. Massachusetts has a system like this. Their State treasurer--not a Republican, a Democrat--says that they're going bankrupt because of it. And yet we're doing the same thing only more in spades right here in the Congress of the United States, and we're not hearing as much about it as we should. Now, I want to real quickly read to you just to let you know what the doctors think. We have some doctors who are going to be talking here tonight, some very eminent doctors. The State medical associations that are opposed to this: the States of Alabama, Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Missouri, New Jersey, Ohio, South Carolina, Texas, the American Academy of Dermatology, American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, American Academy of Ophthalmology. It just goes on and on and on. There's probably 100 of them here. And they're not listening to these people. They're telling us in Congress that people are going to leave the practice of medicine. Now, the other thing that they're not talking about is we don't have tort reform. You know, doctors have to spend an awful lot of money protecting themselves against lawsuits. So we've said in our bill that we really need tort reform. Well, they don't have that. It's not going to be in their bill. So doctors are going to be still unprotected as far as liability suits are concerned. That's another reason why 46 percent of the doctors say they're going to leave primary care. Why wouldn't you? You've got some money in the bank that you've worked your whole life to gain and achieve and you know that one lawsuit will wipe you out, and there's no protection at all in these health care plans they're going to ram through, why would you risk it? Why would you risk lose you are your home and your business and everything that you've worked your life to save? You wouldn't. And so it might be better to go out and do something else. Take the money that you've saved and go into maybe some kind of a private practice that doesn't require this kind of a risk. So I would just like to say to my colleagues back in their offices who probably aren't listening to too much tonight--they're fighting to try to get that last vote or two to make sure they can get this thing passed--think about what you're doing to America. Think about what you're doing to the future generations that are going to be paying for this. We won't be paying for all of it. Trillions and trillions of dollars that we don't have are going to be spent. They're going to have to print that money. Our kids are going to be the ones who are going to have to pay it back through inflation and higher taxes. It's just a terrible, terrible legacy to leave to them. So to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle who may be in their offices, Mr. Speaker, listening to what we're talking about tonight, I hope they'll give this a lot of thought, especially if they haven't made up their minds. Don't leave this kind of legacy to the future generations, and listen to what's going on in Massachusetts that has a similar program. They're going bankrupt up there because of it. And we're going to put a program into place that's going to run doctors out of the business and possibly bankrupt America and run inflation through the roof because we're going to be spending money we don't have so they'll have to print it and raising taxes? It just doesn't make any sense. The last thing I'll say is that the vast majority of the American people in addition to the doctors, Mr. Speaker, don't want this. So listen to your constituents before you go running off a cliff and killing yourselves politically.

Mr. BURTON of Indiana

Mr. BURTON of Indiana. You know, I just love to listen to my colleagues on the Democrat side. I love them so much. And they just don't mention some of the other things that are going on, like the budget this year is $3.8 trillion that we don't have. But the taxpayers are going to have to pay for it. They'll have to pay to for it with inflation or higher taxes. And they don't mention that there's going to be $569.2 billion in new taxes. What the heck, we can afford that. And Medicare and Medicare Advantage is going to be cut by $520 billion. But what the heck, the seniors, they don't have to worry about that. They can, you know, ask their grandkids for some of that money. And of course the total cost is not $980 billion. It's going to be about $1.3 or $1.4 trillion, and I really believe it's going to be more like $2.5 to $3 trillion. We don't have that money, and it's a new entitlement, but what the heck, America. You can handle that. This is just money, and we can always print more. Of course it causes inflation and higher taxes, but who cares. You can get it done.