Marsha Blackburn

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Speaker, the chairman spoke to the cost of these bulbs and how incredibly expensive they are; and, indeed, our constituents have talked about that. And to my colleagues who are going to try to support this standard and this de facto ban on the incandescent light bulb, I would simply say two wrongs do not make a right. I know you heard that as you grew up, and I would ask you to think about that in this Chamber today. Putting this ban, putting these higher efficiency standards in place, many people thought it was the right decision. I didn't think it was the right decision. I voted against it in committee. I voted against all of this on the floor. But I would ask you just to remember the American people are telling us this doesn't work. They don't like the restrictions that are there in the marketplace. They don't like the fact that the bulbs cost too much money. And I would also remind my colleagues that all of the CFLs, the compact fluorescent light bulbs, they are made in China. They are not made here. The CFLs don't work as well. It requires more bulbs to get the same amount of light in a given area. These things have proven to be very vulnerable to power surges. We hear that from our constituents in the rural areas. In essence, Madam Speaker, they don't save any energy, and we know that they are also dangerous because they are filled with mercury. I know that Congressman Burgess, who has also worked on this with Chairman Barton and me, is going to speak to that. There is a provision in this that does address the mercury levels. Also, our legislation says, and I think this is very important, that D.C. cannot mandate the standards on these bulbs, that your State government cannot mandate the standards on these bulbs, that we are going to leave that to the consumer to choose. And consumers want to have that choice. I think so many groups have come out in favor of our legislation and opposed to these light bulbs, even the AFL-CIO has an interesting little bit on their labor union Web site about that light bulb, making the point that there are many ways to save electricity without shifting all these jobs to China for a mercury-filled light bulb. We know that the President thought this was going to help create 800,000 U.S. jobs. The only jobs we have found is that the Winchester, Virginia, plant shut down and those 200 jobs, employees that lost their jobs on September 24, 2010, they saw their jobs go to China. There have been unanticipated consequences of the 2007 act, and it is time for us to say it was bad policy, it was a bad idea, and we need to get it off the books.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, earlier this week my Republican female colleagues spent an hour on the floor of this great Chamber talking about why they have chosen to come to Congress, talking about why they have chosen to leave the private sector and come to the public sector, and talked about why it is so important, so vitally important that they chose to come as Republican women. I think that as you listened to that debate, their stories were inspiring. You realized the diversity of the background of the Republican women that have come to this Chamber, the richness of the experiences, the life experiences that they have brought with them. You also realized how solidly and firmly committed they are to strengthening and preserving this great Nation. I think it's fair to say that our Republican philosophy of government centers on faith, family, freedom, hope, opportunity, and preserving those tenets that really underpin this Nation. I can say that, as a wife, a mother, a grandmother, a small business owner, I've had the blessing of learning firsthand how very important it is that we take our conservative philosophy of life and government into the public sector of our Nation. Daily we work to preserve opportunities for all of our children and our grandchildren. We work to make certain that each and every child in our presence knows the value of, and realizes there is an opportunity for them to achieve the American Dream; that it is a good thing, a healthy thing for them to dream big dreams and to work very hard to make those dreams come true. We know, and we teach our children in our families and our extended families, in our classrooms, that if you work hard, you exercise discipline, you show integrity, and you put others first, that inevitably, you're going to prevail and enjoy seeing your dreams come true in the marketplace of products and ideas. We all know, and we work hard so that our children don't have to work harder. We work hard so that we're giving more opportunities to the next generation. That is why you're going to see our Republican Conference women continue to lead the fight on preserving jobs, rebuilding jobs, rebuilding this economy, making certain that the 21st century economy is jobs-rich for our children and our grandchildren. That is why we have taken the lead on the issue of health care. Women are the drivers when it comes to health care decisions, and we are committed to making certain that we reverse this course that we are on with ObamaCare, that we push to repeal that law, and that we make certain we preserve access to affordable health care for everyone in this Nation. We are committed to strengthening our Nation, our economy, jobs, strengthening our people, and making certain that we secure freedom for future generations.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Thank you, Madam Chairman. As you can see, this is a very simple bill. My amendment would require every single agency covered in this Ag appropriations bill to be accountable to the taxpayers by reducing one nickel out of a dollar for what they have been given to spend. It requires all accounts to absorb that equally, that 5 percent reduction, and it will keep the bureaucracy from picking winners and losers or choosing to fund their pet programs. Certainly the amendment will save the taxpayers money, but this is also a stand for good government. It's about taking responsibility, not torturing the American taxpayer with excuses for ineffective and inefficient bureaucracies. There are a lot of people that say the Appropriations Committee deserves a pat on the back for decreasing discretionary spending by 4.7 percent below the 2008 levels, and I agree with that. I think they are to be commended. Certainly off the President's request, the 13 percent reduction that they have made. I'm part of that effort that has pushed to return our spending to the pre-stimulus, pre-bailout levels, but there is more that must be done. We have to make our government leaner. We have to make it more effective. Every day, Americans are tightening their belts. They're asking government to do the very same thing. Tennesseans keep saying, why is it that government keeps asking us to sacrifice for it when government should be sacrificing for us? Every Federal program needs to be held accountable, and this is a way to do it. Our States have done across-the-board cuts. Our city governments have done across-the-board cuts. Even history will show you that twice before, our Presidents have pushed for across-the-board cuts: World War II, Korean Conflict, there were 28 percent and 30 percent across-the- board cuts in discretionary spending. The reason they did this, Madam Chairman, is because there was a crisis, there was a war, there was a need to restructure, to reorder and to address the priorities of the day. One of my constituents came up to me recently--this is someone who is active in the ag community in our State--and she said, ``It is time that the bureaucracies get their house in order. It is time that you all in Congress stop spending money you don't have on programs we don't want.'' So as we do our due diligence on the spending process, as we act responsibly to our constituents and to the taxpayer, it is time for us to turn to the bureaucracies, the rank-and-file Federal employees who put the pen to the paper on how this money gets spent, and say to them, ``Find another nickel on a dollar.'' We're doing it for the children, we are doing it for our grandchildren, we're doing it to make certain that we stop borrowing 40 cents of every dollar that is spent. This amendment would reduce the budget authority by $951 million. It would reduce the current outlays by $675 million. That would be spread equally at a 5 percent rate across every single agency. It can be done, and, Madam Chairman, in these times of crisis, it should be done as we seek to return this Nation to fiscal stability and to responsibility. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I have an amendment at the desk.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Madam Chair, I demand a recorded vote.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman from Kentucky for his leadership on this bill. Mr. Chairman, it is so interesting to me. We had a 2,700-page health care bill that basically was a government takeover of health care. What we have heard from so many people in this country is gosh, you know, I wish somebody would have read that bill before they passed it. And the former Speaker said we need to pass the bill, and then we can read it and find out what is in it. One of the things that many of the people did not like that was in that bill was many of these mandatory provisions that were put in place, programs that had been on the books for years that were discretionary programs that all of a sudden became mandatory. And the confusing thing, Mr. Chairman, is there didn't seem to be any consistency. As the subcommittee chairman who spoke before me had said, Mr. Pitts had said, you know, you don't tend to children's hospitals in the same way, you don't tend to nurses and technicians in the same way. But here was this conversion from discretionary to mandatory for teaching hospitals, a total of $230 million, over $40 million a year. Now, it doesn't matter if you need the money or not. It doesn't matter if you know exactly where you are going to use it or not. The money is going to be appropriated. It's put on autopilot. Doesn't matter what we say is going to happen with the government, if we need to reduce it. They're going to get that money. That is why this bill is so important. You will notice, Mr. Chairman, that 2,700-page bill, we are able to delete $230 million of that appropriation, mandatory appropriation with a bill that basically is about 2 pages long. What we do in this 2 pages is responsibly address what the American people want to see us address. They know that the Federal mandates are costing private sector jobs. They know that the Federal Government coming in and taking over health care is costing private sector health care jobs. Indeed, we have study after study that is saying we have already lost over a million jobs. It seems like every time we turn around, whether it is our health care delivery systems, whether it is our hospitals, whether it is our physicians' offices, we are hearing about the loss of jobs to health care providers and in the health care sector because of the passage of PPACA, or ObamaCare, as many people in our country refer to the bill. One of the reasons we have to go about repealing these slush funds, Mr. Chairman, is because we simply can't afford this. Every second of every day, every single second of every single day we are borrowing $40,000. We are borrowing 41 cents of every single dollar that we spend. This government is so overspent, we are spending money we don't have for programs that our constituents don't want. And instead of eliminating, what we are saying is, look, let's eliminate a mandatory program and turn it back to what it was for years, discretionary, so that Members of this body bring their discretion to bear on the issues of the day and bring the opinions of their constituents to bear on how this Chamber spends the taxpayers' money. Mr. Chairman, it is not Federal money; it is the taxpayers' money. This government is overspent. We cannot afford all these Federal mandates. It is time to move these programs back to the discretion of this Chamber.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the bill because this is the right step at the right time. If you're listening to the American people, one of the things they have said loud and clear is that they do not want the ObamaCare bill on the books. They want this repealed. When my colleagues ask ``how many times do we have to revisit this issue?'' we are going to keep revisiting this issue until we get every single piece of this bill off the books, because it is too expensive to afford. A great example of this is exactly what we're dealing with, which is the little slice of it that gives as much as may be needed, as much as may be consumed, as much as the HHS Secretary says they will need for this unlimited slush fund to give money to the States for these grants. Now, I will remind my colleagues from across the aisle that our former Democrat Governor has called this program the ``mother of all unfunded mandates.'' Mr. Chairman, there is a reason he called this program such. It is because he knows that putting this burden onto the States is far too expensive for the States to afford. It doesn't make it right to set up a slush fund, which will have no congressional oversight. The HHS Secretary can spend as much as she thinks is necessary, and she does not have to come back to us in Congress for this. We do not need legislation with this nebulous language, and we do not need to give that authority of spending taxpayer money on this to the HHS Secretary. It is important that we distinguish: Are we for reforming health care? There are portions of health care that need to be reformed; but what happened in ObamaCare? PPACA is not health care reform. It is a movement away from patient-centered health care to government control. It is time for us to get back on the right track.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I appreciate the chairman for yielding to me, and I appreciate the opportunity to stand and speak against the Progressive Caucus budget because it is a budget that, once again, will spend too much money. Mr. Chairman, one of the things that we have heard from the American people is this: they are tired of the Federal Government spending taxpayer money for programs they don't want and spending money that they don't have. And it is time for us to put this fiscal house in order. Now, quite frankly, I think that today is a really great day. When we get to the end of this legislative day and the end of this legislative week, we will have passed the Ryan budget, which turns an enormous corner for our Nation. Over the next 10 years, it will reduce spending not by millions and billions, but by trillions--$6.2 trillion over the next 10 years. Those are the kinds of first steps that the American people are wanting to see. That's the kind of fiscal responsibility that the American people are holding us accountable for: controlling spending, limiting spending, and making certain that there is a stable and secure environment in which economic growth and job creation can take place. They have spoken loudly and clearly. And they have said reduce what you are spending, get your fiscal house in order, begin to focus not on the next 6 weeks or 6 months but the next 60 years, and focus on our children and our grandchildren, making certain that we are not tapping their futures and trading it to the nations that hold our debt. I think that it's so important that we begin to arrest this and get it under control and to pass the Ryan budget today.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I do rise in support of H.R. 1217. I think this is an important bill for us to bring forward. And I want to thank the chairman for bringing it forward and for helping to lead this Congress in the repeal of ObamaCare. It is a message that the American people sent loud and clear last November. They do not want to see government coming in and controlling their health care choices. That is something that should be made by individuals, their family members, and their physicians and not by the Federal Government. I have found it so interesting, as we have been through the hearings on this and through the markups, that we continue to hear, well, this $17\3/4\ billion, well, it's just not that much money. Isn't that amazing that in the middle of a CR crisis and a debt crisis that we are hearing such rhetoric? I think it is amazing that we are being told, and through what we know--yes, and some of us did read the bill and so we do know what was in that bill--that the Secretary can spend this however she wants to. She does not have to come back to Congress another time to get permission for spending this slush fund. And isn't it amazing that some of our colleagues think that a fund will make people healthier? Money doesn't make people healthier. We all know that. And isn't it amazing that in the middle of all of this, we are out of money at the Federal level? We all know that the cost of health care is rising, and we know that one of the reasons that the cost of health care has risen so much in the last few years is government intervention. Those are some of the known components that we have. I think it's important to realize too, Mr. Chairman, eliminating the slush fund does not cut any specific program. And proponents of this fund want to claim that we're cutting, we're cutting, we're cutting. What we're doing is saying, no, you can't allow the Secretary to have control and just give it out. This needs to go through the normal, regular funding processes. That is very important. And it's time that we realize we have to do that. Yes, let's move forward. Yes, let's repeal ObamaCare. Yes, let's get it off the books. Let's do everything we can to get the Federal Government out of your pocket, out of the middle of your health care decisions. Let's make certain that those choices go to individuals and to their physicians and that they are not going to be dictated by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, who has a slush fund of $17.75 billion to spend as she or he sees fit over the next 10 years. We need to be changing the way health care is going to work, and we need to do it with putting individuals in charge.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, the promise of our great nation depends on each generation working to leave this country a better place than they found it. Men and women of great service dedicate their lives to the ideals of such a promise. I rise today to honor two public servants, Joe Reagan and Joe Sweeney, as they end their public careers in service to the citizens of Brentwood, Tennessee. All across America, small towns and large cities depend on the leadership, vision, and service of their local elected officials. First elected as City Commissioner in 1992, Joe Reagan's dedication to the City of Brentwood extends far beyond his official title. Reagan's emphasis on community development and sustained growth assisted the city in attaining the highest city bond rating possible, ushered her into the new world of internet and social media, and facilitated the opening of centers of great commerce for Brentwood. One person making a commitment to public service could truly make a difference. The dedicated work and service of Joe Sweeney embodies such a long-lasting truth. Beginning his service in 1972 to one of Tennessee's finest communities, Sweeney was elected to serve the three year old City of Brentwood. Under his 39 year watch, Brentwood grew from 958 households to over 40,000 residents; from a city staff of 15, to an expanded library of 55,000 square feet; and from 64.13 city road miles, to almost 1,000 acres of city parks. Serving several terms in city leadership positions, I am confident Joe Sweeney's fidelity to the City of Brentwood, as well as the higher calling to public service, is what helped to bring Brentwood into a position of prominence in the great state of Tennessee. Dr. Joseph Warren, one of devoted Found Fathers, encouraged the patriots of the young colonies to ``act worthy of yourselves.'' Mr. Speaker, in an age where devotion to public service is not the norm, it is my privilege to acknowledge two public servants who live Dr.Warren's call. I ask my colleagues to join me in congratulating Joe Reagan and Joe Sweeney for their lasting example in devotion to the work of public service.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Gerry House on his induction into the National Association of Broadcasters' Hall of Fame. Gerry's contributions to broadcasting are celebrated in the country music industry. His talent has made a lasting impact on country music and radio. For over three decades, Tennesseans have eagerly awakened to Gerry's voice on his early morning radio show, Gerry House and the House Foundation. Nashville radio loves Gerry House. Not only a radio personality, Gerry is also a gifted songwriter. His songs have been recorded by George Strait, Reba McEntire, LeAnn Rimes, Brad Paisley, Randy Travis and Pam Tillis among others. He has further released two comedy albums, The Cheater's Telethon in 1990 and The Bull in 1992. Gerry's resume does not stop there. He has been voted Billboard's Radio Personality of the Year seven times and Country Music Association Personality four times. He is also a member of the Country Music DJ Hall of Fame, has won Radio & Records Country Format Personality of the Year multiple times and is a recipient of the NAB Marconi Radio Award for Large Market Air Personality of the Year. On April 12, 2011 in Las Vegas, Gerry will become the first country radio personality to be inducted into the NAB Broadcasting Hall of fame. Thank you Gerry House for bringing a smile to countless faces each and every morning. You truly are a staple of Nashville's culture.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, I think there is some confusion about House Joint Resolution 37 and what it does. My colleagues seem to think this would impact the FCC's statutory authority, and I want to call their attention to the actual wording of the resolution. It's eight little bitty lines. If you start on line 3 and you begin to read, it says the Congress disapproves the rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission relating to the matter of preserving the open Internet and broadband industry practices. Now, what this does is to say we disapprove it. If you want to get to the statutory authority, I want to invite you to join us in that discussion. You are going to have that opportunity. It is called House Resolution 96, and it is coming to a committee near you very, very soon, and we look forward to forever prohibiting the overreach of the Federal Communications Commission. Let's also be clear on another point that has been misstated. There have never been telephone rules that regulated the Internet. It didn't happen. They were not there. So we need to be certain that those who are listening to us, Mr. Speaker, realize that never had the Federal Communications Commission, never had the Federal Government regulated the Internet until December 21, when the Federal Communications Commission met after we had adjourned the 111th Congress and decided to go where they had no statutory authority to go. They enacted, they brought the heavy arm of government in and put it on the Internet after these Internet service providers spend about $60 billion a year on spectrum, on maintaining this network. I would also remind my colleagues that when the ACLU decided they were going to go in here and show there was a need, they couldn't even find enough examples.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. There has never been an example of a market failure.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the legislation and thank our chairman, the gentleman from Michigan, for bringing it forth and bringing forth a bill that will limit the EPA's regulatory overreach. It is important that we do. This is an issue that has been going on since 2007, when the Supreme Court gave the EPA permission to regulate greenhouse gases. At that point, I introduced a bill that would have stopped the EPA. Unfortunately, Congress didn't act and the EPA has now issued a final rule, and there will be more rules and regulations on the way if Congress does not step in and take action to stop this. I am grateful that we are stepping forward and making certain that this authority returns to Congress. I urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 910 and reassert Congress's authority over this issue, as it should be, and take it away from unelected bureaucrats.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, if my colleague across the aisle is having a tough time figuring this out, I think we can probably help with that explanation. First of all, if you like the Internet that you have, we are saying we want you to keep it. Mr. Speaker, there has been no market failure. Over 80 percent of all Americans are pleased with the Internet service that they have. What they do not want to see is the Obama administration step in in front of these Internet service providers and say, We the government are here to change your Internet. We are here to take control of your Internet. That is exactly what net neutrality would do. Net neutrality is the Federal Government stepping in and saying, We're going to come first. We're going to assign priority and value to content. It basically is the Fairness Doctrine for the Internet. As I said, there has been no market failure, and there is no need for this government overreach. So many are saying, Why do this? It's one of those issues of power and control, of government wanting to dictate what speed you will have, how often you will be on, the type of Internet service that you will have, being able to control them. What the FCC did after Congress left town, mind you, during Christmas week, was to step in and bring uncertainty to the marketplace. What they did was to say, We are going to put ourselves, the government, in control of the Internet. It is the first time ever this has happened.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I thank the gentleman for yielding. Any time you allow the Federal Government to step in to a process where they have not been involved in a process--and we did this not once but twice. We did it not once but twice.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. BLACKBURN. We all know that anytime you give the government the ability to assign priority and value to content, you have inserted them into the decision-making process. They would precede the responsibility of the Internet service providers. And the gentleman knows there has been no market failure.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. The gentleman knows that that is not relevant to the discussion that we are having here.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Will the gentleman yield?

Mrs. BLACKBURN. What we are talking about is that the application of this is the Fairness Doctrine of the Internet.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Also, in their net neutrality order, if you read paragraph 84, what it does is to bring an incredible amount of uncertainty to the innovative community and to the creative economy that our jobs growth is going to be based on, because what it says to these innovators is, Look, if you want to innovate a new application, a new attachment, a new usage for a Web-based service or for the Internet, you'd better come apply to the FCC first because, if you don't, we can step in and require you to come make application to us. Now, if you want to talk about a chilling effect--a chilling effect-- on all of our high-tech innovation, on health care innovation with our telemedicine concepts, with our health IT concepts, I would encourage individuals to look at paragraph 84, which is found in the net neutrality order that was brought forward on a 3-2 vote by the Obama administration. It will do more to squelch jobs growth and to pull back innovation than any other action in this administration.

Mrs. BLACKBURN

Mrs. BLACKBURN. Mr. Speaker, in response to this statement that there are no savings, may I point my colleagues to a CRS report on the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Federal funding and issues, and I will be happy to submit this for the Record. Reading from it: ``NPR, Incorporated, which oversees the NPR system, states that annually NPR receives direct funding in the range of $1.5 million to $3 million from three Federal agencies and the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Those are the National Endowment for the Arts, the CPB, the Department of Commerce's National Telecommunications and Information Administration, and the Department of Education.'' Now, Mr. Speaker, what we are saying is you can't do that anymore. This is one of the steps that we have to take in order to straighten out this budgeting process. Our country does not have the money to spend on this. NPR does not need the money. They will not be able to get these grants. We will save those dollars. The American taxpayer has said, Get your fiscal house in order. This is a step in that process. I know they don't like it, but, you know what? This is something we can do. This is something we will do. This is something the American people want to make certain that we do so that we get this Nation back on a firm fiscal and sound fiscal policy. The day has come that the out-of-control Federal spending has to stop. A good place to start is by taking NPR out of the taxpayer's pocket. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. BLACKBURN. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.