Marsha Blackburn

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman for those kind remarks. I know that we all share in expressing how much we have enjoyed having these gentlemen with us. We also want to recognize someone. I want to yield to the gentleman from Florida, who has been with us for all too short a period of time. Mr. West is here for his last day on this floor. I know that each of us joins in saying thank you to him. He came to this floor and, Mr. Speaker, he does not back down from the fight. I think that he runs toward that fight when it is a fight for freedom, when it is a fight for getting this government under control and returning us to our constitutional principles, because he is a constitutional conservative. As we have, this week, stood on this floor and have discussed the issues that are in front of us, the issues that the media have termed the ``fiscal cliff,'' you know, many of us have talked about this, that this day was coming. Indeed, the Republicans in the House have been working on this issue for months. My goodness, we sent bills starting in May over to the Senate. They've been sitting on Harry Reid's desk, some of them--the last one went over September 19--and they have chosen not to take up those bills. It's important to note that in that lesson of looking at what the Senate chose not to do and what the leader of the Senate chose not to do, we have people in the House that chose to take an action that would prohibit higher taxes on all Americans. It would prohibit the sequestration from taking place on our military, and it would enable us to move toward a pathway of fiscal responsibility and economic growth and renaissance in this Nation. So at this time, I yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. West).

Mrs. BLACKBURN. We thank the gentleman from Florida for yielding back, and we thank him so much for his service to this House. Mr. Speaker, as we close for the Christmas season, I do want to make just a few comments about what has transpired today. And I think it is so noteworthy that those Members who are departing have stood on this floor tonight and have talked about what it means to serve in the U.S. House of Representatives, and how grateful we are that they have chosen that service. And we each have shared a commitment to make certain that we are committed to pushing--pushing--the Federal Government to get its fiscal house in order. Indeed, Mr. Hensarling many times has said that that is our primary goal as conservatives because we know that the greatest threat to our Nation's security is our nation's debt. Many of us talk about Admiral Mullen's comments on July 6, 2010, when he said that the greatest threat to our Nation's security is our Nation's debt. This week, as we have looked at the so-called fiscal cliff, as we have looked at the expiration of the tax cuts, as we have worked through the growing and just boiling and rolling debt that is sweeping over this government, as we have watched this deficit climb higher every year, we have sought to find a solution to this. As I mentioned earlier in our remarks, we have stood in this House, and going back to May 10, we passed reconciliation August 1, we passed an extension of all the 2001, 2003 tax reductions--they're called the Bush tax cuts. We passed a sequester bill on the 2nd, and on September 19, we passed a pathway to tax reform. Mr. Speaker, what is so significant about that is that those pieces of legislation left here, some of them with a bipartisan vote, all with a strong vote from this body, and they traveled across to the Senate. And from May to September, they found their place on Harry Reid's desk. What is so sad about this is that Harry Reid made his choice. The Senate made their choice. And their choice was to not take up those pieces of legislation. This crisis that we have had, our so-called crisis, the fiscal cliff crisis and Taxmageddon, all of this is a crisis of their making because it is a crisis of inaction. But, Mr. Speaker, many times, that is what happens here. It is inaction, what does not get done, that causes the situation where there is a rush to the last minute. We have had the American people watching closely, and we have had the comments from the President, the comments from different ones in the Cabinet, and the comments from the Senate. But I remind my colleagues that we took our actions here in the body, we sent that legislation, and we did it because we understand that $16 trillion worth of debt and annual deficits of $1 trillion are far too much for our children and grandchildren. The speakers tonight who have joined me on this floor have talked about how we have hopes and dreams for our children, for our grandchildren, for the futures of our families. You know what? If you're facing $16 trillion, $20 trillion, $25 trillion worth of debt as a nation, it is very difficult to see those hopes and dreams come true. My concern as I look at my grandchildren is that the decisions--maybe the selfishness even--of people in Washington who want to tax too much and want to spend too much, who are taxing and spending not their money, but my children and grandchildren's money, children of the next generation, leaders maybe even a generation or more away, they are spending their money, because at this point we are borrowing 46 cents of every dollar we spend. It's not sustainable. That is why we have very thoughtfully, over the last several months, approached this issue, and it's why this week we have worked with our leadership to find a solution to this, to look at different angles. And the decision came that the best decision for this, the best way to approach it, the best way to make certain we address this is to stand firm on the actions that the House has taken and for the Senate to take up the legislation that they've had the opportunity to take up since September 19. They could take up any bill and amend it. They could vote on it. They could send it back to us. They could go to conference. You see, as we talk about our children and their future and as we talk about this amount of debt, what we do not want to do is to cap our children's future and trade to the people that hold our debt. If we're not careful, that's exactly what is going to happen. As we have gone through this process this week, as my colleagues have all watched it and said exactly what has happened, what are the decisions, what are the consequences of the decisions we have made, are we going to resolve it, I do believe that you are going to see a resolution to this. It will happen because the American people are saying to us and they're saying to the President, It is time to get this spending under control. Our children deserve better of us. They have the right to live free lives, to dream big dreams, and to make those dreams come true. I do want to say a ``thank you'' to our leadership. I think the way that Speaker Boehner has handled these issues this week, the way he has worked with the Members in this body to show respect to them, to show respect for their opinions and respect for their constituents, I think that that has been a true sign of leadership that was willing to listen and then willing to move the way the body wanted to move. And the decision was made by the body not to move forward on the Plan B. But I think in making that decision, what you will see is our leadership moving forward more committed and with individuals even more prepared to get to work and to get this solved and to do what the American people are expecting us to do, which is to get this spending under control. They have sent the message loud and clear: Washington does not have a revenue problem; it has a spending problem. It has an out-of-control spending problem and an insatiable appetite for the taxpayers' money. As we have worked through this week, as we've talked to our constituents--and so many of us in this body have done telephone town halls and we have been on the phone and we have answered emails. And we know that there is no limit to how much money, how much of other people's money government will try to spend. There's no limit to how much of the taxpayers' money. So the American people have sent the message to us and we all have sent it to our leadership, and they have listened and they have responded. The time to get the spending under control is now. The time to stop kicking the can down the road is now. And we will head away for Christmas and return, I think, with a strength and a resolve and a courage to address the fiscal issues of this Nation. The House, where the spending bills and appropriation process begins, we will tackle this with strength, with resolve, with courage to get the job done so that, just as my colleagues have said here tonight, so that future generations have a brighter future and so that we will continue to stand for the cause of freedom. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I am absolutely delighted to stand and say ``thank you'' to Mr. Flake--Senator Flake, it will be--and to Mr. Pence. It will be Governor Pence. We are delighted that they have served here. And I will have to say that they have been happy warriors as we have many times stood on this floor and have fought against earmarks, have fought against increased spending. And I dare say, Mr. Speaker, as Mr. Flake crosses the rotunda and into the other Chamber, I don't think the Senate will ever go back to earmarks, because I know someone who can filibuster an earmark with the best of them. That talent is coming to that other Chamber. Indeed, the happy warrior who will be the Governor of Indiana, my concern there, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, is I know some of the reforms that he has in mind for that great State, and I don't want them to become too competitive with my home State of Tennessee. I'm going to be keeping a very close eye on the good work that he is doing there for the people of Indiana and look forward to what he is going to do. It is so very true, and we talk about it a lot, but I think we appreciate it here in this Chamber. Our States are the laboratories of democracy in this great Nation. That is where great ideas come from. They bubble up and they get tested. We know that Indiana is going to have quite a few new ideas that they'll be trying, so we're looking forward to seeing what he will do there. I want to yield at this time to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling) who has worked so closely with these two gentlemen as we have fought expanded government, fought higher taxes, fought uncontrollable and out-of-control spending. I yield to the gentleman for his comments this evening.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. You said there are five taxes that go on January 1. If our colleagues want to look at this list of taxes, are they listed on your Web site?

Mrs. BLACKBURN. As the gentlelady yields back, to the gentleman from Louisiana, I would think that the Republican Study Committee has this linked on their Web site so people can see the taxes that are already going to go up on them because of ObamaCare. We reiterate that what we want to do is lower the spending and get the fiscal house in order. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentlelady. And I know that you're doing a telephone town hall with your constituents tonight. I know you'll probably hear some of the same things that you've said. I've heard from my constituents, too. I heard from one lady who is a small business owner, and she said, I wouldn't mind if my taxes went up and it helped pay down the debt; but she was astounded when she found out that the President wanted to spend this much, and more, and that her taxes would not go down. The money raised from the tax hike would be spent, plus another trillion dollars, and she was not going to see the debt paid down. She was very concerned about that. Well, coast-to-coast we're hearing the same thing. The gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tipton) is also on the phone with his constituents, and we appreciate that you're on the floor with us. I yield to the gentleman.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. To the gentleman from Louisiana, I hate to interrupt, but the Speaker is telling me that our time has expired. We have so much to cover. We were joined by the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. DesJarlais) who's been on the phone. I regret that we are out of time. He has been doing a telephone town hall. We have solutions. The fiscal house has to be brought into order. I thank my colleagues for joining me on the floor tonight to help make the point to the American people. We are going to stay with this fight and solve the problem. Our children and grandchildren deserve it. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the lady for yielding back, and I have to tell you, I loved her Alice in Wonderland example. Sometimes I feel like we should read the ``Emperor Has No Clothes'' because we're spending money we don't have, or maybe ``Goldilocks and the Three Bears'' because it's never quite right what seems to be presented. By the way, Mr. Speaker, I know our colleagues appreciate Mrs. Lummis and what she does; but when she talks about the Nation's Treasurer coming forward and having something that never comes into balance, she knows what she was talking about. She was a State treasurer in Wyoming before she came to Congress. She knows these issues. She knows how you balance a governmental budget. She's an expert in these issues. And to have a budget where you say you never plan for it to balance? Well, when my children were growing up and they were struggling and something was going to be too much of a heavy lift or too hard, I would say, if you fail to plan, then you plan to fail. For this great Nation, for the endurance of freedom, failure is not an option; and it is imperative that the fiscal house of this great Nation be put in order. Someone who knows how to do that so very well, who has done it as a wife, a mother, a State legislator and a small business owner is Mrs. Hartzler from Missouri, and I yield to you.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman, Mr. McKinley, for his well- thought-out presentation and for putting this 1040 form up here from the IRS. And it reminds me, we're coming up on the 100th anniversary of the income tax, the Federal income tax, which was to be a 1 percent tax on the top 1 percent for 1 year. Now the 100th anniversary of that is going to be February 25, 2013. Mr. Speaker, I think this is a grand time to say let's totally overhaul this Tax Code here in the United States. Let's make certain that, indeed, it is fair. The gentleman talked about the small businesses that he interfaces with. My goodness, a convenience store operator, a female that runs a seven-person service shop, a medical application device creator--I've met with all of them in the last couple of days. They can't afford to stay in business because, guess what, they will not be able to make a profit by the time they pay escalated tax rates and are treated, as the gentleman said, like they're some Wall Street business. Also the $63 per health insurance fee that goes on this next year, driving their health care cost up, the $3 medical device fee that is going to be applied to our mobile medical applications. You know, they're taxing every single thing they can find to tax. There are 21 new taxes in ObamaCare, plus all of this we have. This is why we are so passionate about solving this spending issue. I want to welcome to the floor the gentlelady from Wyoming (Mrs. Lummis) who has been a stalwart in making certain that we cut what we are spending. Cut, make some cuts, so that we're wise stewards of the taxpayers' money. I yield to the gentlelady.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the designation of the time and appreciate the opportunity to come to the floor tonight and discuss the issues, the very serious issues, that are in front of us. Now, this is something that we Republicans have talked about for quite a period of time, that we had to get the Nation's fiscal house in order. The reason we had to do this was because we had a spending issue that was in front of us. Many of us felt that running deficits of several hundred billion dollars a year was not acceptable, and we've watched what has transpired through the years as this has continued to grow. And we all know that the last few years of the Obama administration has run deficits, annual deficits, of well over $1 trillion. Now, I am constantly hearing from people, How did this seem to happen so quickly? Well, it's been decades in the making. And as I said, indeed, many of us have come to the floor regularly, we've talked about it, and we've offered bills that would address this. A great example of this, every year I've offered bills that call for 1, 2 and 5 percent across-the-board spending reductions. Little bits add up over a period of time. We have the appropriations process where Members have come to the floor and they've offered amendment after amendment that would reduce what we are spending. We on this side of the aisle also believe that you have to have a budget. Now, the President had a proposed budget, and nobody wanted to vote for that. We put it on the floor, and I think it got one or two votes from the Democrats. The country has not had a budget in over 1,300 days, and there's a reason for this. It is because the budget that we have passed out of this House has gone to the Senate each and every year, and it sits on Harry Reid's desk, and he does not take it up. We have passed this budget, and I commend Congressman Ryan who leads our Budget Committee. We passed it because we think you've got to tackle the drivers of the debt. You've got to bring out-of-control spending under control. You have to restore economic freedom and ensure a level playing field for everybody by putting an end to special interest favoritism and corporate welfare. We feel as if it is imperative to reverse this administration's policies that are driving up the cost of gas at the pump, that we need to be promoting an all-of-the-above energy strategy unlocking American energy production to help lower costs, to create jobs, to reduce dependence on foreign oil, and to strengthen our health care and our retirement security by taking power away--away--from government bureaucrats and empowering patients and letting patients and doctors make the decisions that are important to them. Now, as I said a moment earlier, so many times people will say, How in the world did we get here? Well, as I said decades--decades--in the making. Then we went through the Budget Control Act exercise a year before last in August. We had a select committee that was put in place. That didn't work out. So we ended up with the sequesters. And many of my constituents--and I'm sure other Members are seeing this too--they are saying, Tell me what the sequester is all about. This is what it is. It's going to take place on January 2, 2013, and the defense budget is going to see the brunt of these spending reductions. Most everything gets 2 percent across the board. With defense, you're going to see additional cuts of $55 billion per year. That is going to give them a total of $492 billion additional cuts. This is going to leave our military with the smallest ground force since 1940, the smallest naval fleet since 1915, and the smallest tactical fighter force in the history of the Air Force. Medicare could see $16.4 billion in annual cuts, leading to the elimination of 496,000 jobs in 2013. There will be 62,000 physicians that will be adversely impacted. We know that the sequester cuts are not fair to everybody. As I said, we've been taking steps. Every year for several years, we've talked about getting the fiscal house in order and cutting spending and fighting the growth in the debt. We've also passed some bills this year. And I would like to remind the Members of the body, Mr. Speaker, of these pieces of legislation that this House of Representatives has already passed, and that are sitting on the desk over in the Senate. On August 2 of this year, by a vote of 232-189, we passed the Pathway to Job Creation through a Simpler, Fairer Tax Code Act of 2012. That was H.R. 6169. It would provide an expedited pathway to pro-growth tax reform in 2013. To deal with the spending issues, to deal with the deficit, to deal with the debt, yes, you have to cut spending, you have to reform your Tax Code, and you have to have a pro-growth agenda. That legislation, as I said, was passed on August 2. On September 19 of this year, we passed the National Security and Jobs Protection Act that would deal with the sequester that I spoke about a few minutes ago. That passed with 223 votes. We also had on May 10 the Sequester Reconciliation Act of 2012, H.R. 5652, which passed with 218 votes. We then had the Job Protection and Recession Prevention Act passed on August 1, and that was H.R. 8. It passed with 256 votes. H.R. 8 is the 1-year extension of all the tax rates. We keep hearing that the President wants to extend the tax cuts for those making $250,000 a year and less. What that would do is catch a lot of our small businesses. About 20 percent of our small businesses have already said that this would adversely impact them to the point that they would be cutting jobs, not growing, but actually cutting jobs. So I would point out that 256 Members of this Chamber, on a bipartisan basis, voted to extend the tax cuts for everybody. When people say, Why can't the House and the Senate get together, Mr. Speaker, our bills--as I've just mentioned, these bills are sitting on the Senate leader's desk dealing with the sequester, dealing with taxes, dealing with the reform issues that we have in front of us. These four bills are sitting there waiting for action. The House has done its job. We've agreed to not raise taxes on anybody. That's only one part of this issue. Certainly, with the way the President is wanting to approach tax reform, his proposals would raise enough revenue to run the Federal Government for about 8 more days. He's going to raise taxes on the top 2 percent basically to pay for 2 percent of next year's spending. This is not sustainable. We do not have a revenue problem in this town, we have a spending problem. We have a crushing burden of debt. And now I've got some posters that I would like to show regarding that. This first poster that I want to call your attention to points out exactly what we have in this crushing burden of debt. You will see that in World War II, it lays out our country's long history with this debt and shows where this burden has been passed. As I said, it's been decades in the making. Take a look at this. In 1940, the percentage of our gross Federal debt was 52.4 percent. That's where we were. By the end of World War II, the debt had skyrocketed. It was up to 117.5 percent of our GDP in 1945, and then it peaked in 1946 at 121.7 percent of our GDP. That was through the war. But you know what? We did what Americans generally do. When you have got a problem, you get behind it and you get it solved. So we doubled down on getting the spending under control, and you can see what happened. Then our Federal debt pretty much stabilized in the mid-30 percent range. And during the Reagan administration in 1981, the gross Federal debt was 32.5 percent of GDP. Well, those old spending habits kind of die hard around this place. The Federal Government and the bureaucracy never gets enough of the taxpayers' money. When the President took office, our gross Federal debt was 84.2 percent of the GDP. This takes us back to swearing-in day in 2009. That's the figure that neither party could celebrate, and both parties share responsibility. This Federal Government spends too much money and has for decades. Today, according to OMB, our projected gross Federal debt is 105.3 percent of our GDP. These are just simple facts. You can see what is going to happen if you look at where we are headed. Now we are over 100 percent. Look at how quickly we're going to get to 200 percent, then 300 percent, and 400 percent. This points out how unfair this debt is to our children and grandchildren. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, I think the debt that we have in this country is the ultimate cap-and-trade. What is happening? We are capping our children's futures, and we're trading it to the countries that own this debt. Let me point out who owns this debt. I've got another chart that I want to show you on this specific issue. A lot of people will ask about this. And of course last year during the debates on the debt, we had so many discussions about this. A couple of my colleagues and I went down, and we asked who owned our publicly traded debt. We wanted to know who was buying this American debt. Of course, we've been frustrated with the Fed monetizing some of this debt and running the printing presses. We know that devalues it. We're frustrated that we are running about $4 billion worth of debt a day, and that is adding to the annual deficit, which accrues to the Nation's debt. That frustrates us. So what we've done periodically in my office, Mr. Speaker, is to go back in and check with Treasury and see who owns our debt. As of right now, China owns $1.15 trillion of our debt. Then number two on the list is Japan with $1.13 trillion of our debt. This is interesting. Out of this debt, number three on the list is OPEC. OPEC is an entity. That's the countries of Ecuador, Venezuela, India, Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Algeria, Gabon, Libya, and Nigeria. Guess what? They now are number three on the list, and they own $267 billion of our debt. Brazil comes in at number four, $250.5 billion. And then number five on the list-- new to the top five list--the Caribbean Banking Centers, who now own $240.4 billion of U.S. debt. By the way, the Caribbean Banking Centers are the Bahamas, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Netherlands Antilles, and Panama. This is who owns us. This is who owns our debt. This is why on this side of the aisle what we continue to say is the spending has to be dealt with. We've heard from everybody. We are hearing from economists all around the globe, and they repeatedly say what we are saying, what we've been saying for years as we've come to this floor, that we have a spending problem. The spending has to be dealt with. We are drowning under a mountain of debt. You cannot continue to borrow nearly 50 percent of what you are spending. We think that it is problematic, if you will, Mr. Speaker. It is disconcerting that the President doesn't want to talk about the spending, but is instead offering to raise enough taxes to fund additional spending for 2 percent of the year by raising taxes on the top 2 percent. I guess he's not worried about the other 98 percent of the year. This is how we have to get this under control, by reducing this spending. I'm so pleased to be joined by my colleagues who share a passion for freedom and for economic freedom, and understand that economic freedom and political freedom are linked, and that this is a task that we are passionate about, we are given to solving this problem so that we remain a free Nation. At this time, I want to recognize the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley).

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman. So well said--jobs, the economy, economic growth. We have to have economic growth. And continuing to raise tax rates, continuing to escalate spending doesn't do that. What we want to see is a healthy economy for our future because we know a healthy economy is going to give us jobs growth. Jobs are going to give us the economic growth and prosperity that is necessary for today, for tomorrow, for a healthy economy in this Nation. We know that a healthy economy is going to lead to continued economic freedom and, thereby, political freedom. We know that freedom leads to brighter futures for our children and our grandchildren, and that's what we want. We want these children to dream big dreams and to live in an America where they can come true. Someone who shares the passion on this issue is Steve Scalise, a Congressman from Louisiana, who has recently been elected as chairman of the Republican Study Committee for the next Congress. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. If the gentleman would yield, I think that is such an important point to make, that when you raise the rates, which is a regressive action as you look at tax policy, what you do is to drive down the revenues. If what the President says, Mr. Speaker, is that he wants more revenue, the way to get to more revenue is to clean up the Code, to actually lower your tax rates and to generate more economic activity and growth so that we can begin to grow and reshape our way out of this. You're never going to tax your way out of it. You can't spend your way out of it. I want to invite the gentlelady from New York into this because she is a physician. She knows, with all the ObamaCare taxes, that you're not going to be able to deliver health care with escalating the taxes that are on the books pertaining to ObamaCare. I yield to the gentlelady.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, at this time I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Walden), who is the chairman of the Subcommittee on Telecommunications and the Internet.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and insert extraneous material in the Record for S. Con. Res. 50.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would like to yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), who is a member of the Telecommunications and Internet Subcommittee.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. This week, representatives from 193 countries are meeting in Dubai to reexamine an international treaty dealing with telecommunications. Several hostile countries are seeking to use this opportunity to impose new international regulations on the Internet. We need to send a strong message to the world that the Internet has thrived under a decentralized, bottom-up, multistakeholder governance model. That is why I stand in strong support of Senator Rubio's Senate Concurrent Resolution 50. The U.S. is united in its opposition to international control over Internet governance, and we've seen leadership pushing back against ceding more power to the International Telecommunication Union. It is referred to as the ``ITU.'' It's a branch of the United Nations. Some want to give it new powers. Several countries see the Internet as a tool for political and/or economic control that they want to exploit. For example, Russia's Vladimir Putin has openly stated his intention to seek ``international control over the Internet using the monitoring and supervisory capabilities of the ITU.'' Just last week, the Syrian Government shut off Internet access as the regime sought to suppress the free exchange of information among its private citizens. But it's because the Internet is the ultimate tool of political and economic liberation that we should foster and protect it, not give those who fear its impact on politics and the economy the power to repress its continued innovation and untapped potential. I also want to make an important point about our legitimacy in the fight to keep the Internet thriving, democratic, and decentralized. Unfortunately, we did undermine our credibility when the Federal Communications Commission imposed net neutrality regulations without the proper statutory authority to do so. Even Ambassador Verveer at the State Department had made the point. He said in 2010 that the net neutrality proceeding ``is one that could be employed by regimes that don't agree with our perspectives about essentially avoiding regulation of the Internet and trying to be sure not to do anything to damage its dynamism and its organic development. It could be employed as a pretext or as an excuse for undertaking public policy activities that we would disagree with pretty profoundly.'' We need to pass S. Con. Res. 50 and rebuild our credibility in support of Internet freedom. Regulating beyond our authority at home sets a very bad example when we want to oppose truly devastating regulations at the international level. Despite our domestic disagreements on telecom policy, one thing both sides of the aisle can agree on is that we should uphold the Internet governance model that's working. Let's not try to fix what's not broken. In Dubai, we want our country promoting private markets and U.S. interests. Let's encourage the decentralized governance model that's been successful in the past, and let's show leadership instead of giving away broad regulatory powers to those who don't deserve and who should not have it. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, we have no further speakers, and as I close, I want to thank Ms. Eshoo for the leadership that she has given. She's the ranking member of the Telecommunications and Internet Subcommittee. I also want to draw attention to the outstanding work that Representative Mary Bono Mack did as she led the debate and the discussion and pushed for the resolution, authored the resolution that the House passed earlier on this very issue. I also want to thank her for her work with Senator Rubio and having a resolution that would be agreed to by both Chambers. As Ms. Eshoo indicated earlier, the Senate resolution makes a technical change, a small technical change, in the resolution that was passed by the House. This is where the U.S. needs to stand firm. It's a way that we, in a bipartisan manner, can stand firm for freedom. I encourage the passage of this resolution; and I encourage that we, as a body, will continue to stand for a free and open Internet. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and concur in the concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 50) expressing the sense of Congress regarding actions to preserve and advance the multistakeholder governance model under which the Internet has thrived.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I do rise in strong support of H.R. 6582 today. I am so pleased to stand and to thank Mr. Whitfield and Mr. Aderholt for the work that they have done on this. Also, I want to thank Mr. Waxman for his efforts in this bill. I also want to commend my colleague, Mr. Cooper, from Tennessee. He and I had authored a piece of legislation, H.R. 482, the Water Heater Rating Improvement Act of 2011, and it is now section 3 of the underlying bill. Essentially, what this section 3 would do is to fix a regulatory problem related to the test methodology that the DOE uses to calculate the efficiency levels of water heaters, which even the DOE has acknowledged that the way they're doing this is broken and it does need to be fixed. This legislation will also level the playing field for our domestic water heater manufacturers who are currently at a competitive disadvantage with the foreign manufacturers. Of course we all know our focus is on jobs and the economy and getting our domestic manufacturing back to the pace where it should be for global competition. Essentially the problem is this: under the current standards, the small and large water heaters are divided into two categories under two separate Federal statutes. These statutes are based on an arbitrary gallon capacity and energy input ratings. The smaller water heaters are covered by the National Appliance Energy Conservation Act and are rated using an Energy Factor, or an EF rating. Now the larger water heaters are within the scope of the Energy Policy Act and are rated using a Thermal Efficiency, or TE rating. The problem facing American manufacturers is that under the current rules of the road, only the small water heaters are deemed eligible under the ENERGY STAR program. This is nonsensical. It's an outdated measure and disqualifies our large American-made water heaters from being covered by the ENERGY STAR ratings regardless of how advanced or how highly efficient they may be. The legislation before us today would provide the necessary regulatory and business certainty that is needed by our manufacturers. This legislation has the potential of adding upwards of 1,000 jobs for domestic water heater manufacturers, many of them in my home State of Tennessee, where there are already 3,000 jobs directly involved in the manufacturing of water heaters. I thank the chairman again. I thank the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Aderholt), and I also want to commend the gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cooper).

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, a little bit later today the House is going to vote on the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme Prohibition Act. This is a bill that is very important to our civilian and civil aviation operators. It would block them from participating in the European Union's emission trading scheme. Now the reason this is important is because of this: according to Bloomberg news, the inclusion of the airline industry in the EU's 2005 cap-and-trade program will cost U.S. airline companies between--get this--$10.1- and $39.4 billion from 2012 to 2020. Now who do you think is going to pay that cost? Consumers are going to pay it. The House has already decided we don't want a cap-and-trade system. We voted against that domestically, so why would we want our airline industry to have to participate in this on an international basis? MIT economists have looked at it and said the new rule will increase costs on passengers flying to Europe, all to subsidize their cap-and-trade systems. With rising fuel costs and a down economy, we simply cannot afford this. So for these reasons, I urge my colleagues to protect American sovereignty to support our domestic aviation industry and vote in favor of H.R. 1956.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to commemorate a Music City gem that is celebrating its Diamond Anniversary. This fall marks the 60th Anniversary of the Nashville Symphony Orchestra League. Helping to bring the lofty sounds of the soul to Middle Tennessee, the Orchestra League's good work adds more than just notes to our great State, it adds a glorious soundtrack to our story. The Nashville Symphony Orchestra League works to support and promote the work of the Nashville Symphony. Since 1946, the Nashville Symphony has been enriching audiences and shaping cultural life through a diverse mix of concerts and performances. The Nashville Symphony Orchestra League, founded in 1952, engages the community by providing innovative programs and educational opportunities; a mission that has been at the heart of the orchestra since its beginnings. For over 60 years the Orchestra League has touched countless lives, the young at heart and in age, as it continues to offer time, talents, and treasures to enrich the music. Were it not for the Nashville Symphony Orchestra League, and its hard work throughout the years, Middle Tennessee might not have another beautiful note in her composition known the world over. I ask my colleagues to join with me in honor of those who dedicate their work to the ongoing preservation of the Nashville Symphony; ensuring Nashville's extraordinary and musical legacy rises and settles for another generation of Music City listeners.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, in operating rooms and in hospitals across the great state of Tennessee, there is a team of professional and dedicated workers who serve us in some of our most frail and vulnerable moments. As we celebrate National Surgical Technologists Week, I rise to honor those surgical technologists who have dedicated their life's work to the care, service, and work of our healing. From processing surgical instruments to focusing on patient care and everything in between, Surgical Technologists are a crucial part of patient care. I ask my colleagues to join with me in thanking them and the Tennessee Association of Surgical Technologists for their works of mercy, especially during National Surgical Technologists Week.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman from Kentucky for his good work on this piece of legislation. Mr. Chair, there is a war being waged on energy and on coal in this country. But it's not coming from another country; it is coming from our own government. And we see this taking place every day. Here are a few facts. The United States produces 35 percent of the world's coal, which is more than any other country in the entire world. Most Americans think that we should be using our natural resources to improve the quality of life and to benefit our citizens. And indeed we should. We have more than 250 billion tons of recoverable coal here in this country. Coal produced about 42 percent of all the electricity that was generated in the U.S. last year. Shutting down the coal industry might sound like a good idea at the Sierra Club meeting, but it doesn't make any sense. This legislation is needed because it puts the brakes on the EPA. I encourage my colleagues to support the bill.