Michele Bachmann

Mrs. BACHMANN

Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity that we have in this body to be able to come before the American people and talk about issues of the day that impact all of us. We're talking about one today, and that's really dealing more than anything with the economy and the problems that we're having with job creation. What we want to do in this economy is make sure that everyone who's in the middle class has a chance and an opportunity for a job, and for work and for employment. It was really troubling because there was a story that came out recently that said that over half of all of the adults in the United States--over half--don't have a full-time job. That's what people need. We all know that people want to be self-supporting, they want to be able to support their families, but right now we have a real problem because too many adults don't even have a full-time job. For a lot of Americans who are watching tonight, a full-time job isn't even enough to be able to begin to pay for the bills, let alone put aside some money and save some money to pay for important things, like maybe college for your children, maybe just even to be able to save up and buy a car, or pay off a few bills. People have lowered their expectations, Mr. Speaker, to a point that we haven't seen for a long, long time because people have just, frankly, gotten discouraged. They're discouraged now, and they don't know where the economy is going to lead. In the midst of all of that, we're talking about new impediments that are coming to job creation, one of those being ObamaCare, the fact that the President's health care law is coming into effect. The law says very clearly that the law is to come into effect and that the provisions of the law are to be followed by this upcoming next year, in 2014. Well, we saw that the President of the United States--unilaterally-- effectively waved a magic wand. And as he has been wont to do lately, he is making laws and decrees, really by a press conference or by a press release or just by going to a microphone. And so no longer do the American people even know what the law is or what the law says. Because we presume when a law is passed that we're supposed to follow it--at least that's what the IRS tells us. If a law is passed, they tell us that they're supposed to enforce it. So that's the expectation that people have, that they're supposed to follow the law. Yet the President of the United States said that he's going to put some of these provisions away so that people won't have to follow them. Well, I think our recommendation would be to the President: let's not follow any of ObamaCare; let's put it all in abeyance. Because, as we know, one of the bill's chief authors, Senator Baucus, has said the bill is, in effect, a ``train wreck.'' And that's what's coming down the pike. So we know, according to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, that ObamaCare is the number one reason, Mr. Speaker, why employers aren't creating jobs, another reason why the middle class is suffering. So in the middle of all that, now we're hearing another layer of burden heaped on the middle class, and it's this: now we hear from not only the President, but also from the Senate and some of our colleagues in the Senate on the Republican side, that what we need to do next is offer amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. And it isn't just a few million, Mr. Speaker. At minimum, we're looking at 11 million illegal aliens. In fact, Mr. Speaker, there are estimates that we will be allowing into this country, conservatively speaking, 33 million new illegal aliens into the United States in the next 10 years. That's more illegal aliens than we've allowed into the United States in the last 40 years. If we allow in 33 million new illegal aliens, Mr. Speaker, when we already have 24 million Americans who are without a job--we have 24 million Americans that are unemployed right now in this country, and we're looking, through amnesty for illegal aliens, at allowing in another 33 million. Where are those 24 million Americans supposed to go, Mr. Speaker, when they have to compete not only with the current population but an additional 33 million? Well, if there's anything that we know, it is this: it is that amnesty costs a fortune. Conservatively speaking, we're looking at $6 trillion in costs. And of that $6 trillion, nearly half of that amount is to go to pay out retirement benefits for illegal aliens--at the worst possible time, Mr. Speaker. When all of the baby boomers are looking at having to draw down what they've spent their life paying into Social Security, when millions of baby boomers are looking at drawing down what they've paid in to Medicare, now we're looking at potentially 33 million more illegal aliens coming into the United States also competing for those benefits. But the difference is, Mr. Speaker, they haven't paid in to get those benefits out. We have a lot to talk about tonight. Joining me tonight are some other very concerned colleagues who are also concerned about this issue of illegal aliens coming in to the United States. We have with us tonight the gentleman from the State of Florida (Mr. Yoho), and at this time I'd like to yield to the gentleman. And we have other Members who would like to be heard on this issue this evening.

Mrs. BACHMANN. I thank the gentleman from Florida. We will continue to have this discussion back and forth as we yield to one another. I think you've raised an excellent point, and that's really going back to 1986, when President Reagan told the country that we would have a one-time deal--one time only; this would never be extended again. Only one time will we ever have amnesty. And he assured the country that there would only be amnesty given to about 1 million illegal aliens. It ended up being 3.6 million illegal aliens. Why? Because all of a sudden people realized the door is open, we can go in, and they all flooded across the border. And rather than 1 million people being given amnesty, it was 3.6 million. Then of course this chain migration that expanded beyond that, that goes again to the issue of dealing with the rule of law. What we were told in '86 is that we would once and for all secure that border. Let's see, 1986, 1996, 2006. Where are we now? Oh, yeah, 2013. Over 25 years later, that promise of a secure border is unfulfilled. So I say to you, Mr. Speaker, what in the world are we doing talking about amnesty again when we haven't seen the fulfillment of the promise by President Reagan from 1986? Well, people were so angry and belligerent about that, actually, in 2006, that this Congress passed a bill that authorized building a fence across all 700 miles on the southern border. And they paid for it. They completely funded it. That's something when you get Congress to pay for something, but they did. Well, that was '06. What is it again, 2013? Seven years later this very body passed a bill to build a fence. Where's the fence? There used to be a commercial on TV that was ``Where's the Beef?'' We're saying: Where's the fence? So what we're saying is: No bill. None. No bill. The middle class has had it up to here. They're fed up. They're saying, I don't want my government to lie to me anymore. I want my government to do what I sent them to do, and that is secure the border. With that, I would like to yield to the gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Fleming).

Mrs. BACHMANN. I want to thank Dr. Fleming from Louisiana, because you hit on a great point. That's why we have such a credibility problem right now as the United States Congress, because we say we are going to do something and we don't. I think the only way the American people are going to believe us on this border security is if we in the House declare that if we pass a border security bill, it is only going straight to the Senate and that's it. We are not going to send any bill to a conference committee where we know it's going to get ripped up and turned to something that doesn't even resemble border security. There will be full-blown amnesty buried somewhere in that bill. We know it. How do we know that? Because Senator Schumer on the Senate side said that that's their deal breaker. And that's what President Obama said, that's a deal breaker. I think it's time that this body says that amnesty is our deal breaker--we are not doing amnesty, no way, no how, not until you secure the border. We are a one-track mind. We are going to listen to what we are hearing the people say. I would like to have my colleagues weigh in on that too about what you've been hearing at home. What I've been hearing people say to me is, Michele, we don't get why in the world you don't just secure the border. What are you talking about amnesty for? Just secure the border. That's what I'm hearing. I would just like to ask very quickly--I know we've been joined by Mr. Gohmert and we also have Mr. Brooks here as well--I would like to ask Mr. Fleming, is that what you've been hearing at home? Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentleman from Florida. Is that what you are hearing as well from your constituents?

Mrs. BACHMANN. I want to thank the gentleman from Florida for saying that because I think what I fear is that if we combine these issues in so-called comprehensive reform, what's going to happen is you're going to have selective enforcement, and you're going to pick and choose. Because, again, we saw the President of the United States this week twice say that he is not going to enforce certain parts of ObamaCare. Hey, fine with me, don't enforce any of it, as far as I'm concerned. But do it through the rule of law. Do it through this body. I ran for office, and it was tough to do, and I got here. But my voice counts, just like your voice counts, just like your voice counts, just like your voice counts, just like the Senate's voice counts. Because we are a constitutional Republic. We are not a dictatorial State. We don't have a king; we shouldn't have a tyrant. And yet we are seeing that the President decides, well, I'm going to support something today and maybe I won't. I guess that should give us a clue, shouldn't it, that maybe if we get so-called comprehensive reform that the President may say, well, I'm not going to secure the border because I don't have the political will to secure the border, but I am going to go ahead and maybe speed up amnesty for illegal aliens. So maybe I'll just give them voting rights today because I want to, and I'm just going to go ahead and give them access to ObamaCare today because I want to, and I'm going to give them access to the 80 different means-tested welfare programs because I want to, and plus it will help me in that 2014 election. These are the kinds of things that we need to think about. I now yield to the gentleman from Texas. I would like you to weigh in also. What are you hearing from people back home about amnesty versus border security? Did they want it in the same bill? They don't want it in the same bill? What are you hearing? And this is Louie Gohmert from Texas.

Mrs. BACHMANN. The Secretary of Homeland Security also testified before Congress when she was asked about whether or not the border was secure, she had testified that they didn't even have a metric to know if the border was secure. So what are we doing here? What are we doing here if the Secretary of Homeland Security doesn't even have any possible way to even measure whether the fence is secure?

Mrs. BACHMANN. And that's absolutely true, because ``comprehensive'' is code language for this is really, really bad what's in this bill. Take a look at comprehensive sex education. That's all you need to know. This is really really bad, and it's not going to help anyone. I know we have the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Brooks), who would also like to weigh in. He has been a marvelous voice also on this issue and has been very thoughtful and has a tremendous amount of background on this issue and has participated in a tele-townhall with numerous individuals and has a great deal of information. So I would yield to the gentleman from Alabama (Mr. Brooks).

Mrs. BACHMANN. I thank the gentleman from Alabama. That was a tour de force. I thank you for that. I think the context you gave was wonderful, the fact that we have been extremely generous because one of the numbers you mentioned, that I had heard as well, that the United States of America allows in more foreigners into the United States than all of the countries of the world combined. We are so extremely generous. This year alone I believe the figure was a million people that we allow into the United States legally.

Mrs. BACHMANN. For citizenship.

Mrs. BACHMANN. It's a remarkable number, and when you consider the bill that came from the Senate would double the figure for legal immigration. We're having a hard time assimilating the number of people that we have when we have 24 million Americans who are unemployed right now, we're still allowing a million people in legally, let alone all the other numbers of people who found legal venues to be able to get in, but another number that you mentioned--you talked about the study that came out earlier from Harvard. And in that study which I read at your recommendation, what we are looking at is the average household is looking at a reduction in income and wages of $1,300 a year. That's an enormous amount of money for the average American household because just consider when Barack Obama became President of the United States, the average income per household in the United States was about $55,000 a year. That number has dropped while he's been President. It didn't go up, it has gone down. It has gone from about $55,000 a year down to close to $50,000. And now we know that about $1,300 a year has come in because of the amount of penetration of illegal aliens that are in the United States and how that's bringing down wages. I would add to your comments as well, Mr. Brooks, that as a Member of Congress, I can't vote for anything that's going to take away jobs from legal American citizens. That's what we're talking about when we're talking about amnesty. We're talking about taking away jobs from legal American citizens. From the middle class. Why in the world would we do that? I yield to the gentleman.

Mrs. BACHMANN. I thank the gentleman, and I believe the next population most hurt is actually the legal Hispanic population in the United States. It's their wages that are suppressed. So if you're thinking of a Hispanic mother who's working as a hotel maid, if we have legalization, she could be competing with seven other people who are vying for her job as well. That's what we're looking at right now. And I thank you for bringing that research to our attention. It's very important because, again, what we're looking at is hurting the job prospects of those who are the most vulnerable. And that's one thing that we've seen from the President's policies. He is hurting the people who are on the very economic edge. I'll yield quickly to you.

Mrs. BACHMANN. That is the point. And with that, I'll yield to the gentleman from Iowa (Mr. King).

Mrs. BACHMANN. I thank Mr. King. And we do have a little bit more time. I'm thankful to talk about this topic because this isn't just a 1-hour topic. As a matter of fact, there's a colleague that we were with earlier today who said that we need to talk about this for a full day because, just from a process point of view, for people who are tuning in tonight on C-SPAN, Mr. Speaker, we think it's very important that we don't just go through this topic glibly, because we know this bill wasn't read in the Senate. We were betrayed by our colleagues in the Senate on this bill. This border security isn't border security. It's a fake border security bill that came through. We're not interested in that. The American people aren't interested in that, and we need to have a real debate. We don't want to see, here in the House of Representatives, that the People's Representatives are beguiled or have a boondoggle put in front of them or have a Trojan horse given to us, because one thing that could happen is we could have a great-sounding bill that we're given, and then we're supposed to vote for it. We could pass that bill. We could talk about it for maybe 10 minutes on the floor. Actually, it would be a little bit longer, not much, but talk about that bill here on the floor, pass this Trojan horse, sounds like a really good bill, pass it. And then it could go to a conference committee, where a Senate bill goes into a conference committee, and then that bill, all of a sudden, gets a legalization thrown into it. It can come back to this Chamber, and then that's what we're all told that we have to vote for. And my guess is a lot of conservatives on this side would say, I'm not going to vote for this bill. It has an amnesty in it. And so then what we could see happen is that all of the liberals in this Chamber could vote for that bill because it has amnesty, and just enough Republicans could vote for that bill that it would pass, and it would go to the President's desk. And guess what? It would be Republicans who would be responsible for helping the President pass his number one political agenda action item early in his second term before he's even been sworn in for how long? And it's Republicans that would help pass the amnesty bill? May it never be. I think that the American people right now are just wringing their hands saying, who's going to listen to me? And I think one thing, Mr. Speaker, that at least we've been able to demonstrate is that we have Mr. King from Iowa, we have Dr. Fleming from Louisiana, we have the judge over there, Louie Gohmert, from Texas, we have Mr. Brooks from Alabama, we have Mr. Yoho from Florida. We've got six people here in this Chamber who are going to say, no amnesty no how. What we're going to do is demand border security. We're going to demand that this government finally live up to the promise that it's made to the American people, because we've got to get back to what Representative King talked about, and what each of these Members has talked about, the rule of law, because we think it means something. In fact, we think it's everything. We think, without the rule of law, you have nothing. And that's why I'm so grateful, Mr. Speaker, that we've had this time tonight to be able to be together and talk about this topic. Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?

Mrs. BACHMANN. Oh, we do have a couple of minutes. Well, then we're going to go full tilt. Let me yield to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Yoho). He has something on his mind, I can just tell.

Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. BACHMANN

Mrs. BACHMANN. I will just be brief. It seems like you have the power brokers in this country act like this is such a difficult issue to solve, that this is some big, perplexing issue with immigration. The fact is immigration policy worked beautifully for hundreds of years in this country. And as recently as 1950, when my in-laws immigrated to the United States from Switzerland, it was pretty simple. You had to show that you were physically fit when you came into the country; you didn't have a transmittable disease that other people in America could pick up. That's pretty self-explanatory. You had a little bit of money in your pocket. You didn't have to be wealthy, but you had to show that you had a little bit of money on you. You also had to have a sponsor. You had to have someone here in the United States who would vouch and say if anything happens to that person, I'm the one who will be responsible, I'm the one who will answer. And the person coming in had to verify that they would not become a burden on the taxpayers of America. Because they knew when they came in, they had to come in as a net plus for the country. They couldn't take more out than what they were bringing in. That was the agreement. The other part of the agreement is, whoever came into the country had to swear under oath they would learn to speak the English language--as Mr. Yoho indicated--and they would learn the Constitution of the United States and a little bit of the American history. They had to know that. My in-laws took that very seriously. They were farmers in Wisconsin. They've been net plus to this country, proud Americans. They've fed thousands of people with the work that they've done in Wisconsin. But they kept their end of the bargain. America kept its end of the bargain to my in-laws, but they kept their end of the bargain also. Again, I think Dr. Fleming hit it earlier when he quoted Dr. Milton Friedman, You can't have an open border in a welfare state. Because, you see, in 1950 there was no modern welfare state. That is our problem. We have to deal with our current reality, don't we? Our current reality is we have a gigantic welfare state. Knowing that, we cannot bring people into this country who will not add to the economy. Why would we import into the country people who are going to consume more revenue than what they bring in when they are $17 trillion in debt? This adds up. That's why this is not very difficult to figure out. It is actually fairly simple. All we have to do is abide by the policies that we embraced in 1950, and you've got a solution; you've got a solution to the problem.

Mrs. BACHMANN. What I would say is this: Who is benefiting? The studies all confirm that it is the illegal immigrant who is the recipient of that money. It isn't going to the taxpayers. What we do know from a tax point of view is that illegal immigrants on average pay somewhere about $10,000 in taxes, but they receive over $30,000 in taxpayer-subsidized revenue benefits; therefore, they are a net negative to the American Treasury of $20,000 a year. Now, why in any universe would you import people into the United States that cost us on average, not just $20,000 one time, $20,000 every year? As a matter of fact, Robert Rector has said in his work that the average illegal immigrant cost the United States Treasury over the course of their lifetime about $1 million. Why would we do that? Why would we do that? Because we are robbing from our children. That's why it doesn't make sense. We are hurting the American middle class who are here legally.

Mrs. BACHMANN

Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Speaker, I was watching in my office what the gentleman from Texas was saying, and I was moved so profoundly because this week changed history. It changed history with the definition of America and the United States, but it also changed our constitutional Republic. When the Supreme Court of the United States denied equal protection rights to every American by taking away our ability to elect our representatives, have them give voice to what our opinion is, and then the Supreme Court decides to substitute their morality for that of the people's duly elected people, as they did also in California, now we're looking at a supreme betrayal. Not only did the Supreme Court betray us on the issue of marriage, we've been betrayed by the Senate and also by Republicans in the Senate. We have a fake border security bill that is about to give amnesty to millions and millions of illegal immigrants, and we are about to see that bill now come to the House of Representatives. People are very worried about what they've seen happen this week. One woman was crying to me this morning, saying that, Michelle, our country is falling down around our eyes. So what I told her what we need to do is we need to pray, we need to pray, we need to confess our sins as a Nation, and we need to pray and ask God for his holy intervention and for his forgiveness. We are not over as a Nation, there is a future, there is a hope. But we need to recognize that this week was historic and, Mr. Speaker, the words of Mr. Gohmert were exactly right. This is a very, very important decision. It went at kicking out the fundamental building block of this Nation, which is the family. The hub of the family is the marriage between a mom and a dad. That was hurt this week by the Supreme Court. Now we are looking at violating the fundamental rule of law by legalizing millions of illegal immigrants with this fake border security bill that will never ever come into place. The gentleman has said it well, he said it very well. I want to come up and thank him and congratulate him for his remarks. But to let the American people know there is a future, there is a hope, and we're going to continue to fight here in the House of Representatives.

Mrs. BACHMANN

Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Speaker, on Monday of this week, Lysa, her children, and thousands of admirers gathered at St. Paul Cathedral in St. Paul, Minnesota, to bury the legendary author Vince Flynn. Vince Flynn was known and beloved as a Minnesotan and a great American. He lost his battle with cancer just this last week. He left behind a wonderful family, a beautiful family. He left behind a literary body of work. And, most importantly, he left behind his deep and abiding faith in Jesus Christ. In his hand he held the rosary and also his beloved cell phone. Vince educated America on the threat of Islamic jihad. We will forever remember his strength, courage, and his faith. He had a life well-lived. We will never forget the contributions to America by the wonderful and legendary Vince Flynn.

Mrs. BACHMANN

Mrs. BACHMANN. Madam Speaker, it's a privilege to be able to stand here today and to speak on behalf of the unborn. I have a picture that was taken just yesterday. All of us as parents love to take pictures of our babies. This is a picture that was taken of an unborn baby yesterday. This is the age of the baby--the youngest age, at 20 weeks, that this bill is referencing. And this is a picture of the mom. We're here because we care about women. We're here because we care about the unborn. That's why I support this wonderful bill that's before our body today. You see, we had a very recent, disturbing account of a late-term abortionist. His name was Kermit Gosnell. His actions have made debates like this more important than ever before because, under the guise of being a medical professional, you see, Dr. Gosnell violently ended the life of viable, unborn babies. And, in turn, he seriously hurt or even killed some of the women whom he claimed were his patients. A few days ago, the minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, referred to late- term abortions as sacred ground when voicing opposition to this bill. I found that to be a stunning statement. What could possibly be sacred about late-term abortion? What could possibly be sacred about dismembering this 6-month-old little baby with a pair of scissors as Kermit Gosnell did? What could possibly be sacred about listening to the whimpers and cries of a baby? Because, you see, we know that babies at this age feel pain when scissors are put into their body as it comes to an early end. You see, we are the people who make the laws in our society, and therefore, we have the duty to protect the inalienable right to life of every individual, both the mom and the unborn baby. At 8 weeks from conception, an unborn child's heart begins to beat. By 20 weeks, he or she is capable of sensing pain. And babies as young as 21 weeks have survived premature birth. Madam Speaker, as a woman and as a mom of five natural-born children and 23 foster children, I am appalled by the savage practice of late- term abortion. There is no such thing as an unwanted child, and that's why this legislation is so important. It not only protects the unborn, it protects the mom against the lethal practices of abortionists like Gosnell. And women deserve better than abortion. Unborn children deserve their inalienable right to life. Pregnancy is wonderful. It can be difficult too. That's why we need to show patience and compassion toward every woman as they carry a human life. We are, indeed, treading upon sacred ground. But it's because we're dealing with the sanctity of every human life. And out of respect for this mom and out of respect for this unborn child, I urge my colleagues to vote ``yes'' on this commonsense piece of legislation. I thank Mrs. Blackburn, and I thank Representative Trent Franks of Arizona.

Mrs. BACHMANN

Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of this amendment package which includes three amendments which I've offered to protect and honor America's brave men and women in uniform. The first and the second amendments would both properly train and equip and staff the Marine Embassy Security Group and the Crisis Response Task Force. In the wake of Benghazi and the tragedy there, protecting our Nation's Embassy personnel and classified materials has never been more important. The third amendment requires certain Federal buildings that are already required to fly the POW-MIA flags on Federal holidays to fly those flags every day. We owe it to the memory of those who serve, to honor their commitment and give them the funding and the support that they need. I urge my colleagues to support this package, and I want to thank Mr. McKeon.

Mrs. BACHMANN

Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Speaker, during rollcall No. 195 on the Polis Amendment to H.R. 2217--Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2014, the vote was incorrectly recorded as ``yes.'' I intended to vote ``no.''

Mrs. BACHMANN

Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in memory of the upcoming one-year anniversary of the tragic Memorial Day explosion and fire at the Verso Paper Mill in Sartell, Minnesota. Jon Maus, a father of four from Albany, Minnesota was tragically killed during the accident. This mill has been a fixture in the community for nearly a century, and its destruction and ultimate closure were devastating for hundreds of employees and their families. One year later, the community is still working to recover from this setback. While many of the former workers have found jobs elsewhere or have gone back to school, quite a few are still searching for full-time employment. Our heart breaks for their struggle. But remember that when times are tough, Minnesotans band together. It is because of the love, support and friendship within the Sartell community that I know that they will overcome this tragedy. The Maus Family and all those affected by the explosion and fire remain in my prayers. My staff and I will continue to work with local leaders and community members to make sure that they receive the support they need to get back to work.

Mrs. BACHMANN

Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Speaker, it is with great joy that I have shadowing me today a girl named Desirae, and she is with me as a foster child. It was one of the greatest honors of my life to serve as a foster mother to 23 great kids. May is Foster Care Month. There are 400,000 children in the United States who need a foster parent. We need more foster parents. She and I have been talking about the news of the day so far. We talked about the tragedy in Oklahoma and how our former colleague, now- Governor Mary Fallin, is working so beautifully, together with the staff in Oklahoma, to meet the needs of the tragedy that is occurring. We talked about gas prices being $4.30 a gallon and how building the Keystone pipeline will provide new jobs. Foster children need love. They need stability. They need to be a part of the fabric of this Nation. Let's make them a priority in this country.

Mrs. BACHMANN

Mrs. BACHMANN. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the accomplished students who earned the Certificate of Congressional Merit for their exemplary citizenship and academic excellence. Eleven students from Minnesota's Sixth District were nominated by their schools for this prestigious award and it is a great privilege to be able to share their accomplishments with this Congress. These students have shown that they can set and achieve goals, work as a team member or a leader, contribute to a larger cause, all while making time for study and friendships. They have made significant contributions to their schools and communities and stand out to faculty and staff as students that would never ask for recognition for their efforts. I rise today, Mr. Speaker, to honor these eleven students for their successful high school careers and to wish them all the best in their bright futures: Alyssa Haus, Becker High School; Brianna Vickerman, Big Lake High School; Isaac Darland, Dassel-Cokato High School; Trey Soukup, Delano High School; Eric Rapheal, Forest Lake High School; Diane Wertish, Immaculate Conception Academy; Hannah Zipoy, Kimball Area High School; Emily Kirby, Legacy Christian Academy; Michael Witschen, Monticello High School; McKenzie van der Hagen, Rocori High School; Isaac Eickhoff, St. Cloud Christian School. It was best said by beloved children's author, Dr. Seuss, ``The more that you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go.'' These students are the bright future we have to look forward to in Minnesota and in our Nation. We are looking forward to the successes they will have and the dreams they will follow and the places they will go.