John Barrasso

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. I appreciate the kindness and I appreciate the fact that Senator Hatch is allowing me to work with him. He has a long and illustrious career of leadership in the Senate, and he has been a champion over the years of the fact that States are better than Washington to make decisions because what works in one State may not work in another State. If we give States the flexibility, ultimately they will do it better. They are the laboratories of democracy. That is why we believe in limited government and making decisions at the local level as close to home as possible, which is why I know so many Governors across the country support the State Flexibility Act. I am hoping we get a successful vote in the Senate on it because whenever Washington makes a one-size-fits-all decision, it hardly ever works for most folks back home.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I thank Senator Portman for the incredible job he has been doing as a champion of efforts to create more private sector jobs in this country, to make it easier and cheaper to create private sector jobs, for the private sector to create the jobs we need. Senator Portman showed significant leadership in his campaign last year in Ohio developing the Portman jobs plan. He went to factories and small businesses all across the State of Ohio because he knows small businesses are the engines that drive the economy. Seventy percent of the jobs created in this country are created by our small businesses one at a time. When there are government rules, regulations, redtape, and increased expenses, it makes it much harder because it does not provide the certainty the small businesses of this country need to create those new jobs. They may not be willing to take the additional risk and additional expense because of the unknown concerns. I think that is one of the points that is highlighted in this wonderful plan Senator Portman has put together, along with the members of the Republican Party. A big part of this plan has to do with the rules and regulations that come out of Washington, DC--rules and regulations that may not even be connected to laws that were passed in this body but rules and regulations put forward by this administration, by people who have a different view of how America works. I was encouraged over 100 days ago when the President said he had an Executive order that would try to eliminate some of the redtape. Here we are 100 days later, and it is just another broken promise from this administration. The redtape continues to hold American small businesses hostage. We are trying to cut through that redtape. The American people realize it. The administration may not realize it, but the American people realize it. When the American people were questioned just this last month about whether there are too few regulations or too many regulations and the impact on business, a majority said there are too many regulations on our businesses. How much money does Washington spend on regulations? I will tell you, Madam President. Government spent a record $55 billion developing and enforcing rules last year--$55 billion developing and enforcing rules last year. That is just the spending of government. What is the impact on businesses around the country? For every $1 the government spends to put forth and enforce these rules, it costs businesses of this country $30. That is over $1.5 trillion expended by businesses across the country. That is a drag on our economy, making it harder for them--not easier but harder and more expensive for the private sector to create jobs. There is $30 of business expense for every $1 spent on rules and regulations out of Washington. People are worried because it is going to get worse. There are still 224 rules in the pipeline that have been labeled as ``economically significant.'' What is an economically significant rule? It is a rule that has an impact on the economy of over $100 million. There are 224 of them coming down the line. Is it a surprise that the unemployment rate continues to be so high? It is because of the rules and regulations of this administration. What do the American people believe about this situation? Over 70 percent of the American people believe several different things about the effect of the rules. I will tell my colleagues what they are. This is polling from just last month. They will tell you that additional environmental regulation increases the price of energy for items such as gasoline and electricity. Seventy percent of Americans believe the rules coming out of Washington increase the costs of items such as gasoline and electricity--the energy issues. How much is the pain at the pump costing the American family this year? About $800 per family this year in higher gasoline rates than last year. If you are a family, that has an impact on your quality of life. It has an impact if you are trying to deal with bills, kids, and a mortgage. But there are a lot of regulations out there. The American people see this. Also, over 70 percent of the American people know in their hearts and believe that small businesses--the job creators of this country--are impacted much more than the large businesses of the country. But it is the small businesses we want to help. The other point that more than 70 percent of the American people believe, in a poll by the Tarrance Group, is that if regulations make it too expensive to keep jobs in America, businesses will continue to move overseas. Businesses will continue to move overseas. There is so much uncertainty with the rules and regulations coming out of this town that it is paralyzing the rest of our country. That is just on the rules and regulations aspect that people can see. There are so many rules and regulations that are still coming. I was at a hospital in Cody, WY, talking about health care. I practiced medicine for 27 years, taking care of families all across the Cowboy State. I was visiting a hospital in Cody, WY, and they said they were trying to figure out one aspect of the health care law-- accountable care organizations. It is 6 pages of the 2,700-page law that was crammed through in the middle of the night, with Americans saying: No we don't want this. The people who do regulations took 6 pages of the law and came up with over 400 pages of regulations. They just came out about a month ago. The hospital administrator said: We are having to take money away from patient care, from helping with nurses and therapists to pay for consultants to try to explain these rules and regulations to us so we can abide by them. Those are the kinds of regulations and rules on steroids that I continued to hear about as I traveled in the last week or so at home visiting with people, visiting the communities, listening to what people have to say and the concern and the uncertainty because what is coming out of Washington is a drag on our economy. It is preventing us from making it easier and cheaper for the private sector to create more jobs. People all across the country are concerned, and that is why I am so happy to be here with Senator Portman today and his efforts, his leadership on a jobs plan that is one that focuses fundamentally on the things that will get government off the backs of the American people and let the American people get back to work. I thank Senator Portman for his leadership at a time when we see a government that is borrowing too much, spending too much, and growing bigger every day. I am very appreciative of his efforts to get things back under control and get the decisionmaking out of Washington and back to the hometowns and States across the country.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I come to the floor as someone who has practiced medicine in Wyoming, taking care of families all across the Cowboy State for almost one-quarter of a century. I come as a doctor giving a second opinion, as I have done week after week about this broken health care law that people all around the country are now very concerned about and the impact it is going to have on their own personal lives. We started the whole discussion and debate about health care that the American people knew what they wanted: They wanted the care they need, from a doctor they want, at a cost they can afford. What we have gotten is something that does not provide that at all. I saw today in the Washington Post, under the headline ``Budget Showdown,'' comments about the President's speech yesterday to the Nation. He did talk about Medicare and did talk about Medicaid. I believe that speech was very short, inadequate on the details. It was interesting to see what the Washington Post said about Medicaid. It said: . . . a senior administration official, speaking to reporters on the condition of anonymity, said that . . . ``the details have not been worked out.'' So we have an anonymous source, working in the White House, talking to reporters, admitting that the details have not been worked out. Yesterday, people heard the President's speech on spending, but it seemed to be higher on political attacks than it was on substantive speech--the things we need to be seriously discussing and debating in this country about a huge debt problem with which we are living. The President did mention one bit of substance, though, that should concern the American people. He said: We will slow the growth of Medicare costs by strengthening an independent commission of doctors, nurses, medical experts, and consumers who will look at all the evidence and recommend the best ways to reduce unnecessary spending while protecting access to the services seniors need. What this is is a Washington commission--a commission created in the health law that many know as IPAB. It may sound harmless. It stands for the Independent Payment Advisory Board. Americans, I believe, need to know more about the details as to how this will actually work. Many Americans may not remember that the health care law created this unelectable, unaccountable board of Washington bureaucrats who will be appointed by the President, and the sole purpose is to cut Medicare spending based on arbitrary budget targets. These are cuts above and beyond the $500 billion that was taken from a nearly bankrupt Medicare Program, not to save Medicare for our seniors but to create a whole new government entitlement program for someone else. This board empowers 15 unelected Washington bureaucrats to make these Medicare cuts, all without full transparency and accountability to America's seniors and to elected officials. So, once again, this board proves that the President and the Democrats in Congress who voted for the health care law simply didn't have the political courage to make the tough spending decisions themselves. Instead, they took the easy road. They pulled the classic Washington maneuver--to create a board and punt the decisions to them. Congress gave this board its authority to manage Medicare spending. I didn't vote for it. Members of my side of the aisle didn't vote for it. But this is part of the health care law that was crammed down the throats of the American people. Congress abdicated its responsibility to explain to the American people specific payment changes necessary to keep Medicare solvent. Let's take a look at what happens when this board actually makes a recommendation. The recommendation becomes law. The recommendation becomes law. How can we prevent that from becoming law? The recommendation will become law unless the House and the Senate each adopt--not by simple majority--each adopt by a three-fifths majority a resolution to block them. That is not enough. First, three-fifths of the House, then three-fifths of the Senate, resolutions to block what this board is recommending. Then the House and Senate have to pass legislation to achieve equivalent savings of what this board claims to be saving by the care they deny. This is an incredible concentration of power that should belong in Congress to a board of unelected--unelected--individuals who are appointed by the President. Is there concern about this? In the House of Representatives, there is. There has been a repeal provision created that would repeal this board, and I will tell my colleagues it is a bipartisanly cosponsored attempt to repeal this provision. So that is what we are looking at now. Why? Because the President and the Democrats refused to take a leadership role and chose to punt this down the road. They simply threw up their hands and said let someone else do it. This is not health reform that is good for patients, for the providers, the doctors and nurses who take care of those patients, or for the taxpayers. Fortunately, Senator Cornyn of Texas has introduced the Health Care Bureaucrats Elimination Act. This bill would repeal this board in order to ensure that the doctor-patient relationship that is important to quality health care for all Americans is maintained. I am happy to cosponsor that with Senator Cornyn. We will continue to fight to repeal and replace this very broken health care law. Thank you, Madam President. I yield the floor.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BARRASSO. I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to speak until 11:30 in morning business.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, last week America's government was brought to the brink of a shutdown, and the shutdown was avoided literally at the eleventh hour just last Friday. The same day, the President called Speaker Boehner to try to advance the talks. According to Politico, the President told Speaker Boehner, ``We are the two most consequential leaders in the U.S. Government.'' The President was right, so why was only one of those two leaders actively trying to lead on the issue of the day? Speaker Boehner was trying for weeks to put together a deal that could serve the American people, but right up until the end, the President was missing in action. Even Senator Manchin, a member of the President's own party, said the President had ``failed to lead this debate.'' Now the President is finally saying he wants to talk about what steps our country needs to take to get our fiscal house in order. I really do hope the President is serious, but I have my doubts. This is a line we have heard from the President before. Back in February 2009, the President called experts to the White House for what he called a fiscal responsibility summit. In his opening remarks, the President said this: Contrary to the prevailing wisdom in Washington these past few years, we cannot simply spend as we please and defer the consequences to the next budget, the next administration, or the next generation. That was February 2009. For the last 2 years of this administration, all the President did was add trillions of dollars to that debt. Late last year, the President's debt commission released their report on America's fiscal situation, and the findings were sobering. According to the report, they said the problem is real, the solution will be painful, there is no easy way out, everything must be on the table, and he said Washington must lead. The President ignored the report. America is done waiting for him to take this issue seriously. Last week, the House Budget Committee chairman Paul Ryan put forward the first concrete plan to address our debt crisis. Now the President has suddenly decided that crisis needs to be addressed. The President has a national address scheduled for today, and maybe that will be the moment of truth. I hope it will not be another one of the President's recycled speeches; empty words cannot fill America's pockets. Last November, the American people told us they wanted the truth. They wanted to know their representatives could make tough decisions. That is what we heard on election day. They wanted to make sure there would be a future for their families and for their children. I think the American people deserve results. The President has paid them back with excuses, with delays, and with business as usual. Republicans have been the leaders on trying to reduce the spending. The President's party has only criticized, complained or, in the final moments, tried to take credit. They refuse to lead and have refused to act. Now the President's party wants us to raise the debt ceiling in what they call a clean bill. That is a fancy way of saying they want us to borrow more money with no strings attached. The President opposed doing the same thing back in 2006 when he was a Senator. This is what he said then. The President, on the floor of the Senate, said: The fact that we are on the floor today debating raising the nation's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign the Government cannot pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. I would just say that if President Obama thought raising the debt ceiling at a $9 trillion level was a sign of leadership failure, why then is President Obama asking us to raise it beyond the $14 trillion now? Facts are stubborn things. The numbers do not lie. Every day, this government borrows over $4 billion. We did it yesterday, and we will do it today and tomorrow. Over 40 cents of every dollar Washington spends is borrowed money, much of it from China. Every American child born today and tomorrow and the next day owes over $45,000. Next year, Washington will spend 68 cents of every tax dollar on Social Security, on Medicare, on Medicaid, or interest on the debt. If we as a nation continue on the President's path, Washington will spend all of what it takes in on these items alone. Everything else, from defense to education, will be paid for on a budget of borrowed money. Where is the money going to come from? A lot of it from other countries, countries that do not always have America's best interests at heart. John F. Kennedy once said, ``Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country.'' In a few years, that could change to, ask not what your country can do for you, ask what your country must do for China. Consider this: When John F. Kennedy was President, America only owed 4 percent of its debt to foreign countries. Today, we owe half of our debt to foreign countries. Debt is not just a disaster for our future; the amount of debt we owe right now, today, is so high that it is hurting our employment at home. Experts tell us our debt is costing us 1 million jobs, and the evidence is clear that our debt is disastrous in the present as well as for the future. A debt such as this makes it harder for American families to buy cars and homes, to pay tuition for their kids to go to college, and then it makes it harder to create jobs for those kids who will be graduating this year and next year until we get the spending under control. The President's party simply offers more of the same old failed policies that produced the problems in the first place. Some in the President's party have suggested raising taxes to make up for the debt. I expect the President to do that this very day in his speech. The President's speech today comes just a few months after he submitted his budget. After seeing that budget, it is hard to take the President seriously. Don't take my word for it; one writer in the Washington Post said it already: President Obama's budget was irresponsible, failing to take on entitlements and relying on rosy assumptions. The international magazine The Economist called the budget ``dishonest.'' America needs a President who shows real leadership and a concrete plan. That is what the American people are expecting. I will not vote to raise the debt ceiling unless some very specific steps are taken. It is time we passed a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution. Many States have to balance their budgets, families have to balance their budgets, live within their means. Washington needs to do the same. It is also time for us to place actual legal limits on what we do spend. A statutory limit on total government spending will force Washington to make the hard decisions each year to get us back on track. A hard cap on government spending will start us on the path toward fiscal balance and sustained growth. Ronald Reagan used to talk about starving the beast. That is what we need. Since President Obama took office, the beast has only grown fatter. The President's party likes to accuse their opponents of being antigovernment, so why didn't the President's party bother to pass a budget or fund the government last year when they should have? And why are they driving our government further into debt, hurting America's standing and our credit on the world stage? The President's party likes to pretend they are standing up for the little guy. They should have listened to Ronald Reagan when he said: ``You can't be for big government and big spending and big taxes and still be for the little guy.'' The President and his party are for big government, big spending, and big taxes, and they are not for the little guy. The fact is, the President and his party are not that interested in solutions. Instead of solutions, the President's party has hidden behind nasty words, words like ``extreme'' and ``Draconian.'' Many American families are living within the same budget they had in 2008, and Republicans believe the government should do the same. Is spending no more than you did in 2008 extreme or is it extreme to support trillions more in wasteful Washington spending? Is tightening our belts like families do Draconian or is it Draconian to spend money we don't have and force our children to pay it back? Some members of the President's party have gone even further. One leader of the President's party said that Republicans wanted to starve 6 million seniors. That is a pretty disturbing claim. The problem is, the Washington Post said that she made it up. This same person called the Ryan plan a ``path to poverty''--a ``path to poverty,'' she said-- ``for America's seniors and children.'' The Ryan plan doesn't affect anyone over the age of 55. It saves Medicare for those who have not gotten there yet, and it stops the spending that puts every American on the path to permanent poverty. Meanwhile, the President says he doesn't want to point fingers. Yet so far his White House has responded to the Ryan plan by doing nothing but point fingers. They went back to their same old bag of tricks, and they tried to scare our seniors and their families. The President also accused Congress of playing games. Yet his first budget was nothing but a giant game of kick the can, and his address today looks more likely to be just another campaign speech rather than a legitimate plan for the future. The time has come to lead, not sit on the sidelines. The time has come for the President to act, not just to talk. As a doctor and a Senator, I believe our economy is in need of critical care. Our budget is hemorrhaging. There is not a quick or easy fix. A bandaid will not help this patient. Treatment cannot be delayed. The time to act is now. I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BARRASSO. Well, it is my impression that in so many ways Washington gets it wrong. The Senator is correct. I appreciate his leadership. I did have the opportunity to serve in our State legislature in Wyoming for 5 years. The constitution in Wyoming says you have to balance your budget every year.

Mr. BARRASSO. We balanced our budget every year, just like the families in Alabama or Wyoming have to balance their budget every year and have to live within their means. That is what we do. You take a look at the revenue, and then you do not spend any more than that. You live within your means. That is what families do. It is what the State does. That is why I was so proud to stand with the Senator as one of the cosponsors of the balanced budget amendment to the U.S. Constitution. I think this country has to balance its budget and do it every year. The President's spokesman yesterday--kind of the word of the day at the White House seemed to be ``vision.'' He kept saying the President is going to give his ``vision.'' The day before, the word was ``balance.'' In his press conference, he kept saying the word ``balance.'' I would like to hear a vision that we have to balance the budget of the United States. That is what I want to hear from the President today when he gives his speech at 1:30 this afternoon. I do not want to hear some recycled speech about, well, raise taxes, but that is what I am anticipating from the President. I have talked to people in Wyoming after church on Sunday morning, and they have seen you, I say to the Senator, on Sunday morning talk shows--I think last week with Bob Schieffer; ``Meet the Press'' the week before that. They say: Do you know that Senator? I say: Yes, I do. They say: Well, he makes us proud because he talks about the kinds of values we have--living within our means, balancing our budgets, not leaving our children or our grandchildren with mountains of debt. They agree with the Senator when he makes his statement about--I think the Senator quoted someone from the budget commission about this is a predictable crisis that is coming. Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said the greatest threat to our Nation's security is the debt. And look how much we owe to foreign countries, significant amounts to China. You cannot continue to be a great nation with a debt like that to foreign countries, often moneys owed to people who are not our friends, who do not necessarily have our own best interest at heart. So it is incumbent upon us as a nation to get this spending under control. That is what I see as the main issue. Hearing Senator Isakson on the floor and Senator Blunt and others talking about this, it is why all 47 Republican Senators together unanimously endorsed the idea and cosponsored a balanced budget amendment to the Constitution, because we know that is the responsible thing to do.

Mr. BARRASSO. Well, they would want to know if whoever would say such a thing was actually still connected to the reality of the real world and trying to live within our means. You cannot do that. You cannot do that for very long at all. When you look at the President's budget, when you look at the spending that has come out of this administration and you look at the debt our country has accumulated since the time George Washington became President, what you see is that from the time George Washington became President until the time George W. Bush left the White House, this President, through his spending and his budgets, has doubled the national debt in 5 years and tripling it in 10. That is what this budget he had submitted to the Congress just not that long ago--a couple months ago--has done. Now we are going to hear a new--I am not sure what we are going to hear today. Are we going to hear him standing behind the budget? The President put together a debt commission to take a look at this. I am still not sure where he stands on his own commission--the President's own commission--what his position is on that, because they have taken some strong positions, where he is in relationship to the reality we are facing today with this predictable crisis coming. So it will be interesting to hear what the President says this afternoon and what his new vision might be.

Mr. BARRASSO. My impression is that he should have a responsibility to do that and do it for Congress. Last week, there was going to be a major speech--last week or the week before--on energy at a local university. He went and made a speech on energy, and the headline was that it was the same old speech on the same old issues, and very little new was there. So the concern today is, we are not hearing anything in front of Congress. It is a speech at a local university. I am hoping to hear what a real vision is. What is the roadmap and the specifics? The other Chairman of the debt commission--you mentioned Erskine Bowles--the other was Senator Al Simpson from Wyoming. He was quoted today to say: We need specifics. If the President just talks in generalities, that is not going to go very far. I think specifics is what the Senator just outlined. As the ranking member of the Budget Committee, you would actually like to see numbers on a piece of paper that can be scored, and we can go look through it and say: Will this work? Will this not work? How do the numbers add up? Let's get into the specific details because that is what we are looking at. When you have a nation that is spending $3.8 trillion or $3.7 trillion and only bringing in $2.2 trillion, the problem is we are spending too much.

Mr. BARRASSO. I think that would be the only responsible thing to do because right now the Congress is dealing with the budget that was submitted a couple months ago. That is the confines in which we are working. So it will be interesting to hear what the President says a little further down the line from now. I see Senator Coats from Indiana is joining us on the floor. He knows that in Indiana, families who are trying to live within their means and make ends meet and paying more for gasoline now due to the President's energy policies--about $700 more per family a year for gasoline. If they are trying to deal with bills and the mortgage and kids, it makes it that much harder. So families get it. Families know what happens when there is a squeeze, and they cut back on their spending for other things. That is what this country needs to do right now. That is what we need to do as a nation. I am so glad Senator Coats has returned to the Senate because he had been here previously and has now returned to join us to give us some of his sage advice and recommendations, and it is really wonderful to work with him. I say to the Senator from Alabama, I know you welcome him as well. But with that, let me say thank you so much for your leadership. As I told the Senator, the people of Wyoming after church say: Do you know that guy who was on television this morning? He sure did express the values we all have.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I would like to take the opportunity to express my appreciation to Max Weiss for his hard work as an intern with the U.S. Senate Committee on Indian Affairs. I recognize his efforts and contributions to my office as well as to the State of Wyoming. Max is a native of Wyoming and graduated from Rock Springs High School. He graduated from Leiden University in the Netherlands where he received his master of science in clinical psychology. As my intern in Rock Springs and in Washington, DC, he has demonstrated a strong work ethic which has made him an invaluable asset to our office. The quality of his work is reflected in his great efforts over the time he has been with us. I thank Max for the dedication he has shown while working for me and my staff. It was a pleasure to have him as part of our team. I know he will have continued success with all of his future endeavors. I wish him all my best on his next journey.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I would like to take the opportunity to express my appreciation to Hanna Winzenried for her hard work as an intern in my Washington, DC, office. I recognize her efforts and contributions to my office as well as to the State of Wyoming. Hanna is a native of Wyoming and graduated from Cody High School. She currently attends Brigham Young University, where she is majoring in French studies. Throughout her internship, she has demonstrated a strong work ethic which has made her an invaluable asset to our office. The quality of her work is reflected in her great efforts over the last several months. I thank Hanna for the dedication she has shown while working for me and my staff. It was a pleasure to have her as part of our team. I know she will have continued success with all of her future endeavors. I wish her all my best on her next journey.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I would like to take the opportunity to express my appreciation to Jonathan Knight for his hard work as an intern in my Washington, DC, office. I recognize his efforts and contributions to my office as well as to the State of Wyoming. Jonathan is a native of California and graduated from El Dorado High School. He currently attends the University of Wyoming where he is majoring in political science. Throughout his internship, he has demonstrated a strong work ethic which has made him an invaluable asset to our office. The quality of his work is reflected in his great efforts over the last several months. I thank Jonathan for the dedication he has shown while working for me and my staff. It was a pleasure to have him as part of our team. I know he will have continued success with all of his future endeavors. I wish him all my best on his next journey.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I come to the floor today, as so many of my colleagues have, to discuss the situation we find ourselves in. Many ask: What has happened? Why are we here? Why is there so much coverage and concern about a potential shutdown of the United States Government? I was on a radio station report from Washington by phone to Wyoming earlier this morning with a friend of mine, and he was asking how we got into this situation and what we can do about it. Well, there are two different situations we are in. One is, we are in this situation because a budget, a responsible budget, that should have been passed 7 months ago--when the Democrats were in charge of the House, in charge of the Senate, and in the White House--was never passed. That is what we are dealing with today in one part. The bigger part of how we got into this situation is that we are a nation in significant debt. We owe a remarkably large amount of money-- $14 trillion is the number that is consistently discussed. Very few people have a concept of exactly how much money that is. Yet we owe that amount of money. People say: Who do we owe it to? I visited with a group of high school students from Douglas, WY, earlier this week, and I asked them: Do you know who we owe the money to? They said: Yeah, we owe a lot of it to China. That is of great concern to the people of America, people concerned about national security, our financial security, and how we as a nation are viewed in the world, as well as how we view ourselves. As families across this country, we live within our means. We balance our budgets every year. I am from Wyoming, where, according to our constitution, we must balance our budget every year, and we do. That is why we have money available for scholarships and other opportunities for young people, as we invest the money that we have saved from year to year in our people, in our future, in our communities, and in our land. Yet Washington doesn't seem to learn that lesson, even today. So here we are with this situation where we are looking at a potential shutdown of the government because this government has maxed out its credit card. Others may decide to no longer extend credit to us, and it has come down to the final hour. Every day this government spends $4 billion more than it takes in. Last month, Washington spent eight times as much money as it took in. Every American child is now born owing $45,000. This is a travesty. When I take a look at this and say, we know now how we got into this situation: We have overspent. Our problem is not that we are taxed too little, it is that we spend too much. The American people understand that. So what we need to do is get the spending under control. We need to spend less. We are in a situation where you say, what can we do about it right now, today? Well, for those same high school students who are here from Douglas, WY, they know a bill starts in the House and then goes to the Senate, and is passed by one body, passed by another body, goes to the President for his signature. So here we are. We do have a bill that has been passed by the House of Representatives to keep the government open, to keep the government functioning. I am ready right now to vote for that bill. What has the President of the United States said about that? The President has threatened to veto that bill. He said he would veto a bill that would temporarily extend and keep the government open for 1 week. So apparently the President is not interested in keeping this government open for the next week through tonight at midnight. I would wish he would take a different tack and say, let's continue to work on the overall problem but keep the government functioning. You know, families all around this country--and I talk to people every weekend in Wyoming--are worried about the cost and the quality of their own lives. When they look at this incredible debt coming out of Washington, they say, how is this going to continue to impact us? The families all around Wyoming and around the country and the States are finding they are going to pay about $700 more for fuel this year than they did last year because of the pain at the pump. Of course, I believe that is made worse by the policies of this administration. But for families who have kids and with bills and a mortgage, $700 increased gasoline prices impacts them in the money they have available for other things. So it is a direct impact on the quality of their lives. They are looking back here to Washington saying, what are those people doing? I had a call yesterday in my office from a man in the military. He said, why are they not going to continue to fund the military? Well, that is part of the bill that has passed the House that will continue to keep the military funded, functioning. He said, you know, I am not worried about me. He said, I am worried about these younger guys, the newer ones in the military, the men and woman who may have a young family. I want to make sure they are taken care of. He said, do not worry about me. Worry about them. Think about each and every one of those young men and women who are in uniform defending our country. Why would the President say: If you pass what the House has passed-- which does cut some spending and keeps the military functioning--I will veto it? That is what the President of the United States said, he would veto it. Rather than keep everything functioning and fund the military, the President has said he would veto it because it was only a 1-week extension, so that all of the other issues could be worked out. Remember, all we are talking about is this year's budget. We are now at 7 months into the fiscal year. This is something that should have been done last year. But the Democrats have absolutely failed to live up to their obligations of passing a budget. Certainly failed the obligations of living within the budget. But there is a proposal today to keep the government open, to fund the troops, and yet I hear the President of the United States say no. There has been discussion on this floor about things that are called policy riders. It was interesting because today in Politico, there is a headline: ``Dems Embraced Policy Riders in the Past.'' What sort of policy riders? When I hear on the floor: Oh, no, policy riders are all bad. Well, the repeal of a school voucher program in the District of Colombia. That was a policy rider in the past. Travel to Cuba, that was a policy that Democrats put in in the past. And it mentions a project--they call it a pet project--of the majority leader. It says: Delaying the development of Yucca Mountain as a nuclear waste storage site, as part of a policy rider on a budget bill issue. So this is something that, to me is not new, to this body is not new. What is new is that the President of the United States has threatened to veto and to shut down the government of this country because he will not deal with a bill that will fund our troops, and will make cuts in spending because it is for a time-limited issue, and at a time when we ought to say, let's keep the government open and let us fund the military. Who, in fact, would be wanting for there to be a shutdown? I am not looking for that sort of thing. And then I see there is someone who has actually been rooting for a shutdown. It is the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee, Howard Dean. These are the things that he said about a shutdown. He said: ``If I was head of the Democratic National Committee, I would be quietly rooting for it.'' He went on to say: ``From a partisan point of view, I think it would be best thing in the world to have a shutdown.'' Is that what we need, a partisan point of view? What we need are solutions for America. I see that there are colleagues on the floor ready to speak. So with that, I ask that we come to a solution, deal with the issues of the incredible amount of debt, keep the government going, pass what has passed the House, fund the troops, cut the spending and get this to the President to sign. I yield the floor.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I would like to take the opportunity to express my appreciation to Laura Capasso for her hard work as an intern in my Casper office. I recognize her efforts and contributions to my office as well as to the State of Wyoming. Laura is a native of Wyoming and graduated from Kelly Walsh High School. She currently attends the University of Wyoming/Casper College Center where she is majoring in psychology. She has demonstrated a strong work ethic which has made her an invaluable asset to our office. The quality of her work is reflected in her great efforts over the time she has been with us. I thank Laura for the dedication she has shown while working for me and my staff. It was a pleasure to have her as part of our team. I know she will have continued success with all of her future endeavors. I wish her all my best on her next journey.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I would like to take the opportunity to express my appreciation to Laura Curran for her hard work as an intern in my Cheyenne office. I recognize her efforts and contributions to my office as well as to the State of Wyoming. Laura is a native of Wyoming and graduated from Central High School. She graduated from the University of Wyoming where she majored in English and minored in creative writing. She has demonstrated a strong work ethic which has made her an invaluable asset to our office. The quality of her work is reflected in her great efforts over the last several months. I thank Laura for the dedication she has shown while working for me and my staff. It was a pleasure to have her as part of our team. I know she will have continued success with all of her future endeavors. I wish her all my best on her next journey.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I would like to take the opportunity to express my appreciation to Kelsey Linford for her hard work as an intern in my Washington, DC, office. I recognize her efforts and contributions to my office as well as to the State of Wyoming. Kelsey Linford is a native of California and graduated from Centennial High School. She currently attends American University, where she is majoring in political communication and minoring in French. Throughout her internship, she has demonstrated a strong work ethic which has made her an invaluable asset to our office. The quality of her work is reflected in her great efforts over the last several months. I thank Kelsey for the dedication she has shown while working for me and my staff. It was a pleasure to have her as part of our team. I know she will have continued success with all of her future endeavors. I wish her all my best on her next journey.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I would like to take the opportunity to express my appreciation to Welchie Patterson for his hard work as an intern in my Washington, DC, office. I recognize his efforts and contributions to my office as well as to the State of Wyoming. Welchie is a native of Wyoming and graduated from Sundance High School. He graduated from the University of Wyoming, where he majored in political science. Throughout his internship, he has demonstrated a strong work ethic which has made him an invaluable asset to our office. The quality of his work is reflected in his great efforts over the last several months. I thank Welchie for the dedication he has shown while working for me and my staff. It was a pleasure to have him as part of our team. I know he will have continued success with all of his future endeavors. I wish him all my best on his next journey.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I am pleased to recognize the Centennial of Platte County, WY. Although today's Platte County is vastly different than that of 100 years ago, its vibrant history connects the two. The early inhabitants, who were then part of Laramie County, campaigned passionately for the division of the county. They had distinguished themselves as functional communities, and they contributed to the State's economy by strengthening their ties to the railroad, agricultural development, and mining industries. They wanted an independent identity. On April 28, 1911, a headline in the Wheatland World jubilantly announced, ``County division carries! Platte County a reality.'' Their success represents Wyoming's spirit of independence. Platte County consists of 8,200 residents in the five communities of Wheatland, Guernsey, Hartville, Glendo, and Chugwater. Parts of Wheatland's unique irrigation system are still visible. In the early 1880s, engineers created a system of canals to transport water from manmade reservoirs through the mountains to the town below. Such foresight assisted in the taming of a small section of the great Wild West. A few miles outside of Guernsey stands Register Cliff, a sandstone outcropping upon which emigrants recorded their names and dates as they traveled the historic Oregon Trail. Wagon ruts from the trail are also visible and remind us of the grand journey people made. The Sunrise Mine, located just outside of Hartville, was one of the largest iron mines in the country, producing over 42 million tons of iron ore during its 80-year operation. Platte County is the only county in Wyoming with two State parks: Guernsey State Park and Glendo State Park. Both parks contribute to the area's irrigation systems, as well as provide excellent year-round recreational opportunities for Wyoming residents. Livestock production has always been a major enterprise in Wyoming; Chugwater earned distinction as the headquarters for Swan Land and Cattle Company, one of the largest cattle outfits in the United States. Now, new generations of ranchers continue the cattle legacy. Today, Platte County helps meet America's growing energy demands. The Laramie River Station powerplant, located northeast of Wheatland, delivers electricity to two separate power grids and is one of the largest consumer-operated, joint power supply ventures in the country. Strides have been made in developing renewable energy technology, including plans to harness Wyoming's wind. Also impressive is Platte County's proximity to the Niobrara Shale Formation, a shale rock formation that covers four States in the West. Drilling beneath this formation will provide numerous opportunities for oil and natural gas production. Madam President, in celebration of the 100th anniversary of Platte County, I invite my colleagues to visit this historic place. This year, the Platte County Centennial Committee has planned several countywide celebrations and has announced its motto, ``The People, the Land: Past, Present and Future.'' I applaud the citizens of Platte County in their efforts to celebrate such rich history and to present it to visitors from all over the world.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I rise as someone who lives in a State where we balance our budget every year, where the citizens of Wyoming and families all across the State live within their means, balance their budgets. They know what it means to have to live within a budget. That is why our State is one that currently today does not have a deficit, does not have a debt, a State where every year, by constitutional mandate, we balance our budget. It is time for Washington to take a lesson from Wyoming and balance its budget. This irresponsible spending must stop. Here we are, a day from when it looks as if we may be dealing with a government shutdown, and I am ready to vote. I am ready to vote for a bill that already passed the House of Representatives early today. I am ready to vote to keep the government open and functioning, to make sure services are there. The bill passed the House. People who have studied civics in school realize that is how we make a law in this country. It passes the House, the Senate, goes to the President, who signs it into law. The bill has already passed the House. It is coming to the Senate. I don't know where other Senators are, but I am ready to vote. I heard my colleague talk about a shutdown and who was rooting for a shutdown. It is no surprise to people who may be watching at home that it is former Democratic National Committee chairman Howard Dean who is rooting for a shutdown. The former chairman of the Democratic National Committee says: I think it would be the best thing in the world to have a shutdown. He is the spokesman for the party of the other side of the aisle. That may be what he wants. I don't want to do that. I want to vote for the bill that passed the House. It is the only proposal that is out there. I haven't seen the Democrats offer anything. Even the New York Times said of the President that he was ``silent for too long.'' We have heard our previous speaker talk about the social issues. Let's remember that it is convenient amnesia for Democrats to talk about that specific issue because the President voted for and signed into law spending bills that included similar--actually the identical social issue in the past, the one he is opposing today. So did 49 current Senate Democrats. They also voted for a spending bill that dealt with that social issue. Why all of a sudden today it is different? I believe it has to do with what the former chairman of the Democratic National Committee said: I think it would be the best thing in the world to have a shutdown. Republicans are proposing solutions. What do we see from the other side of the aisle? We see the senior Senator from New York saying, ``I always use the word `extreme.' '' It doesn't matter what is proposed. He says, ``I always use the word `extreme.' '' There are tape recordings of him saying this. He then said, ``That is what the caucus instructed me to use this week.'' Regardless of how reasonable a proposal may be, regardless of the solutions that may be proposed, ``I always use the word `extreme.' That is what the caucus instructed me to use this week.'' I travel back and forth to Wyoming every weekend, visit with people and sit around at different locations, sometimes a morning breakfast group, sometimes it is people at lunch, dinners, community meetings. I ask them: How many of you believe you have a life that is better than your parents had? Every hand goes up. Then I ask: How many of you believe your children will have a better life than you have right now? Very few hands go up. That is the problem. I ask them: What is the concern? Why do you believe you have a better life than your parents did but your children will not have as good a life as you? The answer they give is the debt, the reckless spending in Washington--reckless, irresponsible, unsustainable. Yet, when we want to go ahead today, do cuts in spending, keep the military going, deal with the issue at hand, keep the government functioning so we can come back and continue to work on the debt and the spending, this body is not ready to vote. I am ready to vote. I am ready to vote for the only proposal on the table--the one the Republicans in the House of Representatives passed today. That is real leadership. It is a plan. It will work. It is what the American people are asking for. I have people from Wyoming coming to Washington all the time. They say: We realize things are tough this year. They come and explain a program that is good for people in the community, good for children, good for seniors--I met with six or seven groups like that today--good for students in school. They say: We know that all of us are going to have to deal with the realities of the facts, that we can't continue with this unsustainable spending where 40 cents out of every dollar we spend is borrowed, significant amounts from overseas. Our No. 1 lender is folks in China. I say: Is that your concern? That is absolutely the concern I hear around the State of Wyoming. They see that the President of China comes over and tells America a few weeks ago that he wants the Chinese currency to be the currency of the future and the dollar to be the currency of the past. That is because he knows we have an addiction to spending, and it must stop. That is what I hear from people from Wyoming who come here as well. They say: We need to make sure we get the spending under control. It seems reasonable to get back to the level of 2008 spending. That is the level many American families are living under. They balance their budgets. It is time for Washington to do the same. I know the people in Wyoming. I have visited with a number through the week and in many communities last weekend--in Worland, Caspar, Laramie. What they are saying is, get the spending under control, and do it in a reasonable manner. But for someone to come from the other side of the aisle and say he thinks the best thing in the world to do is to have a shutdown and for another person to say he always uses the word ``extreme'' because that is what his caucus instructed him to use this week--that doesn't solve the problem. That doesn't let us find a solution. There is a solution on the table right now. It is a solution that has been proposed. This Senate ought to be voting on it tonight. For the President to say he is going to veto it shows that the President is truly not engaged in this process. He has been silent too long, according to the New York Times. His budget that he has proposed, the Economist, a world-renowned, respected publication, called ``dishonest.'' That is not the kind of leadership we need. We need someone in the White House fully engaged, taking an active role, and making sure we get back on a course that is responsible, that allows us to live within our means, as families know, because we have to stop spending money we do not have. Stop spending money we do not have. That is the way for Washington to behave in a responsible way, to make the difficult decisions necessary for the future of the country, to focus on the issues that affect families and their needs. Families who are trying to deal with kids and bills and a mortgage know what it means to have to live within their means. When we see policies coming out of this administration that are ones making the pain at the pump even worse, as families are noticing they are paying $700 on average more for gasoline this year than last year, that is money that is not available for other bills or for a mortgage or to help with their kids. Those are the issues they are facing, people trying to pay for their own health insurance, realizing the increased cost of the insurance because of the Obama health care law that passed way over the objections of the American people, crammed down the throats of the American people by the other side of the aisle. The American people are saying: This is absolutely wrong. That is why I think we saw last November the election results we did across the country. That is why we see people continuing to stand up and speak out across the country. That is why people continue to go to townhall meetings and share their views about the problems happening in this country. It is interesting. When I think of the great Presidents through the history of our country--we all have our favorites--I think of Ronald Reagan. He said that you can't be for big government and big spending and big taxes and still be for the little guy. We have on the other side of the aisle people who are for big government, big spending, and big taxes. They are not for the little guy. I yield the floor.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Madam President, I come to the floor today as a doctor who has practiced medicine in Wyoming for about 25 years. During that time I was medical director of something called Wyoming Health Fairs where we provide employees low-cost blood screening for early detection and early treatment of medical problems. We know one of the things that was attempted to be solved with the discussion on health care was to have people involved in their own health care decisions and early detection, as well as prevention of disease. I attended a health fair last weekend in Worland, Washakie County, WY, where I had a chance to meet with a number of folks, including people from small businesses. First, I wish to congratulate this body, and specifically Senator Johanns from Nebraska, for the repeal of the 1099 form regulations which significantly burden small businesses all around the country. I also come to the floor as someone who has practiced medicine and has been watching the health care law closely. It is one that I believe is bad for patients, bad for providers and nurses and doctors who take care of the patients, and bad for the American taxpayers because I think this is going to add significantly to our growing debt problem. These are things that need to be addressed. One part of the health care law, the 2,700-page law that was passed, dealt with something called accountable care organizations. Those are intended to help people coordinate care and have that coordinated care increase people's health by early detection of problems and to help minimize problems but also attempt to save money. The six pages of the health care law that dealt with accountable care organizations has resulted in the release of regulations on March 31, 429 pages of regulations which have a significant impact on restructuring the way medicine is practiced. As I look at this in terms of our growing debt, my concern is that the administration is bragging that the regulations save Medicare money, about $960 million total, best care scenario, over a 3-year period. So savings of less than $1 billion, a restructuring of the way medicine is being practiced, a savings of less than $1 billion, at a time when Medicare will be spending over those 3 years over $1.5 trillion, a savings of less than $1 billion on an expenditure of over $1.5 trillion. The other aspect that was so interesting in watching this administration is they have come out with a statement about regulations. The small businesspeople I talked to in Worland last weekend at the health fair told me that increased government regulations add to the cost of doing business and make it harder for them to hire more people. Specifically, it is related to increased costs. It was interesting to see the administration saying that an increase in labor demand due to regulations may have a stimulative effect that results in a net increase in overall employment. The administration apparently believes if we increase the rules and regulations on businesses, it will make it better for them, when they will tell us universally that it will make it worse. Additionally, last Friday night the Department of Health and Human Services released their new next round of ObamaCare waivers. We have talked about those in the past on this floor as part of a doctor's second opinion. If this health care law is so good, why do millions and millions of Americans say: We can't live under this, and the administration agrees and grants them waivers? So this past weekend, Secretary Sebelius added another 128 waivers covering another 300,000 Americans to say: No, for the next year, you get a 1-year waiver, you do not have to live under the mandates of ObamaCare. So now we are at a point where the total number of waivers granted has been over 1,000, covering 2,930,000 people. So, wow, what is the breakdown of those people? Who are they? How can they get those waivers? Well, it is interesting. In this country, where union workers are just a small percentage of the total workforce, 49 percent--almost half--of all of the waivers have been granted to people who get their insurance through the unions. I just looked at this list that came out, and it is interesting because one of the waivers that had been granted for 13,000 employees, enrollees, is for the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. So let's see what we can find out about them. If we go to their Web site and go to the area that deals with health care, what it says is this: Thanks to your hard work-- This is to people in the union-- Thanks to your hard work over the last year, Congress passed a health care reform bill that was signed into law by President Obama. This landmark reform is a hard-fought victory for [the United Food and Commercial Workers Union]. . . . Well, wait a second, these are the same people who went in and asked for and got a waiver from the Secretary of Health and Human Services--a waiver so they do not have to live under it. Now, it is interesting, if you go to this Web site, you can click to other things, and what you can find is that you can actually watch a video on the Web site of the people who just got a waiver--a video of the members of this union ``rally and talk about health care reform.'' Oh, the health care they are rallying for, but they do not want it to apply to them. The Secretary of Health and Human Services says: That is fine, you can have a waiver. Oh, you can actually ``see the pictures of [union] members taking action on health care reform.'' But it is not the action of applying for the waiver--a waiver they have just been granted by the Secretary of Health and Human Services. Now it says: Call your members of Congress to thank them for passing real reform. Oh, you are supposed to thank the Members of this body for passing something, but then they applied for a waiver that has been granted for over 13,000 members who get insurance through this program? They say you can also check an area to read the background information on this union's ``advocacy of health care reform''-- advocacy for a program they wanted to force down the throats of the American people but yet do not want to live under themselves. This health care law is bad for this country, it is bad for our patients, it is bad for our health care providers, and it is bad for taxpayers. The union members who absolutely lobbied for it are now saying--now that they have read the bill, now that they know what is in the law, they are saying they do not want it to apply to them, so much so that one of the unions that has gotten a waiver, on their recent Web site, said: . . . we are . . . challenged by how to implement the law under prevailing circumstances. Well, the prevailing circumstances are the law they wanted passed. It says: The Trustees of the Fund have no ability to secure additional contributions needed to cover the increased costs of providing these required-- Required by the people on the other side of the aisle who voted for this-- additional benefits. It says: The Trustees are requesting a waiver from HHS to preserve the annual benefit limitation now in place for the part-time plan of benefits to minimize the cost impact of transitioning to the requirements of the reform act. . . . Well, what it basically says is that these folks who want the waiver are saying what I have been saying on this floor since the beginning of the debate: that this is going to be bad for taxpayers, it is going to drive up the cost of care, it is going to drive up the cost of insurance, in spite of the President's promise that if we pass this, families will see premiums drop by $2,100, in spite of the President's promise that if you like your plan, you can keep it. What we are seeing, for the people who proudly lobbied for this, is that they do not want it to apply to them. They realize now it is going to cause their plans to have significant problems. I believe every American ought to be able to have a waiver, every American ought to not have to live under this health care law. To me, it is unaffordable, it is unmanageable, and I believe it is unconstitutional. That is why I come to the floor, as I have every week, with a doctor's second opinion that we must repeal and replace this health care law. Madam President, I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

Mr. BARRASSO. Mr. President, today the President is heading to Philadelphia to talk about energy. Well, the President talks a good game but, unlike energy, talk is cheap. The President plans to host a townhall meeting about his new energy policy. I think it is time the rhetoric face the reality of what the country is seeing, experiencing, and dealing with. If the President truly wants to get a handle on energy costs, he needs to start by immediately stopping his Environmental Protection Agency from attempting to enact backdoor cap-and-trade regulation. That is exactly what the EPA is doing. The only effect that can have is to increase energy costs on American families. The President himself admitted as much in 2008. At that time, in an interview with a San Francisco newspaper, he said: ``Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket.'' Is the President serious about decreasing U.S. dependency on foreign oil? If so, he should then rescind his veto threat against today's congressional legislation regarding the policies of the EPA. That is why I am here in support of the McConnell amendment. The McConnell amendment keeps energy prices low. It prevents the EPA from blocking the development of domestic energy. It restores the Clean Air Act to its original congressional intent. I support the McConnell commonsense amendment. Most likely, today we will hear more of the same from the President in his speech and townhall meeting in Philadelphia, and more of the same is the last thing the American people need right now. American families are facing increasing gas prices. Our national security is being jeopardized by dependence on foreign sources of energy. Unrest in the Middle East and North Africa is driving high prices even higher. The Department of Energy has made an estimate that families all across this country will spend $700 more on gasoline this year than they did last year. Meanwhile, the President will most likely deliver another speech with great goals but limited action. With gasoline at over $3.50 a gallon, the President fails to appreciate the effect his administration's policies have on families with bills, with kids, and with mortgages to pay. In 2008, President Obama, then a candidate for President, said that the problem wasn't that gas prices were too high but that they had risen too fast. In his words, he said he ``would have preferred a more gradual adjustment.'' This may explain why the President spent his first 2 years in the White House undermining and abandoning an all-of- the-above approach to energy. It is no wonder that he is now trying to cast blame on those who are offering a responsible alternative. The President says he wants to cut our imports of foreign oil by a third by 2025. Well, to me, he doesn't appear to have the right vision or political will to get there. The United States has the most combined energy resources on Earth, but when faced with new sources of U.S. energy, the administration's automatic response has been to regulate, delay, or to shut down. The President's ``say one thing, do another'' policy is making the pain at the pump even worse. His approach is long on making promises, short on taking responsibility. He talks of his concern for the people affected by the gulf oilspill. Yet his drilling shutdown in the Gulf of Mexico killed their jobs and strangles energy production even today. U.S. offshore oil production is expected to drop 15 percent this year thanks to the policies of this administration. The President's claim that blaming his administration for ``shutting down oil production''--he says it doesn't track with reality. But I will tell you that the administration's stalling on gulf oil and gas drilling permits is so antibusiness that even former President Bill Clinton called it ``ridiculous.'' Even as the President says he wants to cut oil imports, he told an audience in Brazil a week or two ago that he wants the United States to become ``one of Brazil's best customers'' for oil. He said he would expedite new drilling permits. He claims oil companies are ``sitting on supplies of American energy just waiting to be tapped.'' But the biggest thing standing in the way is redtape from his own Interior Department and EPA. While ``use it or lose it'' makes for a nice sound bite, it ignores the reality that the Obama administration's own policies are the most significant roadblock we have to drilling and exploring for American energy. The President also claims to support alternative fuels. Yet he didn't once mention converting coal into fuel or tapping oil shale. Oil shale production could produce an estimated 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil. That is three times the amount of Saudi Arabia's oil reserves. The way we can address our economic and national security needs is by producing more American energy. We can't afford to pick and choose our energy at a time of uncertainty. We do need it all. This means allowing more U.S. exploration and lifting the burdensome regulations that make it harder for Americans to produce more energy. Renewable energy is part of it, it is important, but there is no way green energy and green jobs can replace the red, white, and blue energy and jobs that have continued to power our country for over a century. Until the administration acknowledges this, the administration's policies will continue to make the pain at the pump even worse. That is why I urge the Members of this body to adopt the McConnell amendment. With that, I yield the floor.

Mr. BARRASSO

Mr. BARRASSO. I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.