Dave Camp

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would just say that if Minority Leader Pelosi and Senator Reid appoint conferees, there's no reason for taxes to go up. With that, I would yield----

Mr. CAMP. I thank the gentleman from New York for withdrawing. These letters, many of them were written to both parties, both leaders. I think Mr. Levin and I both received these letters. They were written to the Congress. It's routine that we do these. And on his own time the gentleman may do as he wishes. I would say, Mr. Speaker, our economy is too weak and the American people have been struggling for far too long for Congress not to work out our differences. America is not on vacation, nor should the Senate be. We have 2 weeks to find a solution and send something to the President for his signature. That is what House Republicans are proposing today. Let's look at the differences between the House and the Senate. The House extended unemployment for 13 months. The Senate bill extended unemployment benefits for only 2 months, meaning an estimated 4 million Americans could lose the extended unemployment benefits next year they would get under the House bill. The House reformed the unemployment program to focus it more on getting people the training and education they need to get back to work, not just handing out checks. The Senate did not. The House protected seniors' health care for the next 2 years by ensuring doctors in the Medicare program don't have their reimbursements cut by more than 27 percent. The Senate did this for only 2 months. The House provided a 1-year extension of the payroll tax holiday, ensuring a worker earning $50,000 next year has $1,000 more in their pocket. The Senate did this for only 2 months, meaning that same worker would have less than $200 in their pocket, or $800 less in take-home pay than under the House-passed bill. The House included a pay freeze for Members of Congress and civilian Federal workers. The Senate did not. The House put an end to welfare benefits being accessed at ATMs located in casinos, liquor stores, and strip clubs. The Senate did not. The House protected Social Security by reducing overpayments. The Senate did not. The House included a provision that saves taxpayers $9 billion by cracking down on fraud and abuse that is known to exist in a refundable tax credit program. The Senate did not. The House provided for economic growth and job creation in the high- tech industry through spectrum auctions. The Senate did not. The House cut taxes to promote business investment and hiring. The Senate did not. Mr. Speaker, while it may sound like there are great differences between the House and Senate bill, it's not a difference over policy. It's simply a difference between the House deciding to act and the Senate deciding not to act on so many items. The House bill includes commonsense reforms the American people want, and it adopts a number of the President's legislative initiatives which represent the bipartisan cooperation the American people are demanding. All told, 90 percent of the House bill is paid for with policies the President has endorsed in one form or another. So what's really standing in our way? I've heard the President's people say that this breaks the agreement over the discretionary caps in the Budget Control Act, but look at that talking point. Those caps are adjusted only because we are proposing, as the President has before, to freeze the pay of Members of Congress and other Federal workers. Do the President and the Senate really want to risk unemployment benefits, a middle class tax cut, and reimbursement to doctors treating seniors and those with disabilities because they don't want to freeze the pay for Members of Congress and Federal workers? Mr. Speaker, it's not too late. I urge all of my colleagues to support a 1-year extension of the payroll tax holiday, 1 year of unemployment benefits with critical reforms, and a 2-year extension of reimbursements for Medicare doctors. I urge my Democrat colleagues to name conference committee members to resolve the differences between the two bills. Conference committees are a Jeffersonian concept, and we would be wise to follow the model laid out by our Founding Fathers. If the Senate agrees to work together, we will help get the American people back to work and get those struggling in this economy the help they need. Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., Arlington, VA, December 19, 2011. Hon. John Boehner, Speaker, U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Hon. Harry Reid, Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC. Dear Leaders: On behalf of Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC), a national association with 75 chapters representing more than 23,000 merit shop construction and construction-related firms with nearly two million employees, I am writing to express our opposition to H.R. 3630 as amended by the Senate last week. Whether Congress ultimately chooses to extend these various provisions, the proposed two month stop-gap measure merely serves to delay the inevitable tough decisions, compounding the climate of uncertainty that continues to impact small businesses. This sort of temporary fix underscores Congress' uneven, ad hoc approach toward the economy and causes more harm than good for America's job creators. Moreover, a two month extension of the payroll tax holiday creates an untenable administrative burden for employers in the construction industry and beyond. In a letter sent today to leaders of the tax writing committees, the National Payroll Reporting Consortium warned of ``substantial problems, confusion and costs'' associated with the extension's implementation. America's small businesses should not be punished for Congress' inability to do its job. Instead of passing the buck for another two months, the House and Senate must work together to determine their policies for the full year and provide some semblance of certainty for the companies driving our economy. Sincerely, Geoffrey Burr, Vice President, Federal Affairs.

Mr. CAMP. Regular order, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the motion to instruct, and I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would just say to my good friend from Maryland that we just voted on the Senate amendment. It was rejected by this House. Just yesterday, Minority Leader Pelosi told the media, ``I don't think we should go to conference.'' In those same reports, the minority leader said that, if the House passes a motion to go to conference on the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act, she would not appoint any House Democrats to participate in the negotiations. Set aside for a moment that a conference committee is the established way for resolving differences between the House and the Senate. It's an idea that was best articulated by Thomas Jefferson, one of the Founding Fathers and someone who provided the foundation for the rules of this House. Set aside the fact that Democrats are, with 2 weeks left before critical programs expire, refusing to work. Instead, let's just focus on what the leader of House Democrats said. The minority leader declared that she would not appoint any House Democrats to a conference committee. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has echoed those same comments. So I ask them: Who are the Democrats seeking to instruct with this motion? If the Democrats won't even appoint conferees, how can they instruct conferees? Clearly, this is nothing more than a partisan, political stunt that keeps us from doing what the President has asked us to do and what House Republicans have agreed to do: pass a 1-year extension of the payroll tax holiday and a 1-year extension of unemployment benefits. Turning to the substance of the motion to instruct for a minute, it seems like we've already debated this today. The motion asks the House to recede to the position of the Senate, meaning the deeply flawed bill that would sunset in 2 months and that payroll providers, job providers--experts--have said would be administratively unworkable, and that even the administration concedes would pose challenges for employers. I urge the defeat of this motion to instruct, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tipton).

Mr. CAMP

Mr. CAMP. That is correct. The language in the bill provides States with the option to screen and test UI program applicants for illegal drug use.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I would just note that this legislation incorporates more than a dozen proposals that the President has either offered, supported, or signed into law. In fact, more than 90 percent of the bill is paid for with such policies. With that, I would yield 3 minutes to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Kentucky (Mr. Davis).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. There are four important facts everyone should know about the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act: First, it will strengthen our economy and help get Americans back to work by lowering the tax burden for middle class families and job providers alike; Second, it prevents massive cuts to doctors working in the Medicare program to protect America's seniors and those with disabilities-- providing more stability in the doctor payment schedule than there has been in a decade; Third, it adopts a number of the President's legislative initiatives, which represents the bipartisan cooperation Americans are demanding; and Fourth, it's fully paid for with spending cuts, not job-killing tax hikes. The CBO tables show the bill is fully offset and saves about $1 billion. And when you add in the flood insurance provisions, the savings are closer to $6 billion. So it will help families struggling in this economy; it will help the unemployed get and keep a job; it helps seniors; it's bipartisan; and it is paid for. The House should--and I expect it will--overwhelmingly pass this measure, and the Senate should quickly pass it so Americans can get what they truly want this holiday season--something that helps create jobs while helping those most in need. While this bill includes the priorities of a number of committees, many of the provisions in H.R. 3630 are within the purview of the Ways and Means Committee. This bill will extend for 1 year the payroll tax holiday to help middle class families struggling in this economy, while fully protecting the Social Security trust fund. Mr. Speaker, I have a letter from the Social Security Chief Actuary confirming this fact that I would like to place in the Record. Social Security Administration, Office of the Chief Actuary, Baltimore, MD, December 12, 2011. Hon. Dave Camp, Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: We have reviewed the language in the ``Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2011'' (H.R. 3630), which you introduced on December 9, 2011. We estimate that the enactment of this bill would reduce (improve) the long range actuarial deficit of the Old Age and Survivors Insurance and Disability Insurance (OASDI) program by about 0.01 percent of taxable payroll. All estimates are based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2011 Trustees Report. Sections 2001 and 5101 would have a direct effect on the OASDI program, as described below. Section 2001 of the bill, ``Extension of Temporary Employee Payroll Tax Reduction through End of 2012'' would extend through 2012 the provisions of subsection (c) of section 601 of the ``Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, and Job Creation Act of 2010.'' Enactment of section 2001 would have a negligible effect on the financial status of the program in both the near term and the long term. We estimate that the projected level of the OASI and DI Trust Funds would be unaffected by enactment of this provision. Specifically, this provision would make the following changes for payroll tax rates and OASDI financing in 2012: (1) for wages and salaries paid in calendar year 2012 and self-employment earnings in calendar year 2012, reduce the OASDI payroll tax rate by 2.0 percentage points, (2) transfer revenue from the General Fund of the Treasury to the OASI and DI Trust Funds so that total revenue for the trust funds would be unaffected by this provision, and (3) credit earnings to the records of workers for the purpose of determining future benefits payable from the trust funds so that such benefits would be unaffected by this provision. For wage and salary earnings, the 2.0-percent rate reduction would apply to the employee share of the payroll tax rate. For self-employment earnings, the personal income tax deduction for the OASDI payroll tax would be 59.6 percent of the portion of such taxes attributable to self-employment earnings for 2012. Section 5101 of the bill, ``Information for Administration of Social Security Provisions Related to Noncovered Employment,'' would require that all State and local governments report to the Secretary of the Treasury all distributions from any employer deferred compensation plan made after December 31, 2012. This requirement would make available to the Treasury and the Social Security Administration any amount of such distributions that is based on earnings from employment with State and local governments that was not covered under the OASDI program. This required reporting by State and local governments would effectively eliminate most noncompliance with individual reporting of distributions from deferred compensation plans that results in the application of the windfall elimination provision and the government pension offset provision for OASDI benefits. Enactment of section 5101 of the bill would reduce (improve) the long-range OASDI actuarial deficit by about 0.01 percent of payroll. We estimate that other sections of the bill would have no direct effects on the OASDI program. Please let me know if we may be of any further assistance. Sincerely, Stephen C. Goss, Chief Actuary. Without an extension, a worker earning $50,000 would see his or her take-home pay decline by a $1,000 in 2012, as compared to 2011. Employers are helped too. Through an extension of 100 percent expensing, job creators down the supply chain will see more demand for their products. This will help boost economic activity and job creation. The President has endorsed both of these tax policies. The bill will also extend unemployment benefits that are scheduled to expire at the end of the month, but does so while permanently reforming the program and adopting the President's plan to wind down recent expansions of the program. Since 2008 extensions of unemployment benefits have added $180 billion to the debt. We're putting an end to that deficit spending. This program is fully paid for, and it contains significant reforms, such as allowing States to screen and test unemployment insurance recipients for drug abuse, overturning a 1960s-era Labor Department directive; requiring all unemployed recipients to search for work; be in a GED program if they have not finished high school, with reasonable exceptions; and participate in re-employment services. It also implements program integrity measures such as new data standardization to crack down on waste, fraud, and abuse. And just as we did in connection with welfare reform, we're giving the States flexibility to design their own re-employment programs similar to the sorts of programs the President has touted, like Georgia Works and wage subsidies. Why are we making these reforms instead of just passing a straight extension? Because we know that a paycheck is better than an unemployment check. These bipartisan reforms will help get Americans back to work while providing them with assistance during hard times, and that should truly be the focus of unemployment programs, getting people back to work. In addition to reforming UI, we extend Federal benefits but reduce the maximum number of weeks of all benefits from 99 weeks to 59 weeks in most States by mid-2012. This reflects a more normal level typically available following recessions. I should point out that phasing out 20 of those weeks is the President's policy. As a result of this extension, an estimated 5 million out-of-work Americans will receive an average of about $7,000 in assistance they need in this tough economy. A ``no'' vote today is a vote to deny those Americans who are out of work those benefits. We also end UI for millionaires. The bill simply says if you earn $1 million you have to pay back your unemployment benefits. Though not in the jurisdiction of the Ways and Means Committee, the bill applies a similar policy to food stamps. Together, these policies save taxpayers $20 million. Additional savings are found by freezing the pay of Members of Congress and other civilian government workers for 1 year. Next, the legislation prevents a 27 percent cut to doctors serving Medicare patients and replaces it with a 1 percent payment update in 2012 and 2013. The 2-year update is the longest that Congress has provided since 2004, which will give us time to develop a permanent solution. In addition to the Medicare doc fix, the legislation reforms and extends temporary Medicare payment programs. Since 2002, Congress has blindly extended as many as a dozen of these programs. Given that we're running a $1 trillion deficit and borrowing 40 cents out of every dollar we spend, the American taxpayer simply cannot afford to have Congress skip out on doing proper oversight. That's why we're extending only four of these provisions, and we're making reforms to some and requiring additional studies from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Government Accountability Office to get better data on how they're working. These programs are the therapy caps exceptions process, premium assistance for low-income seniors, ambulance payment add-ons, and geographic payment adjustments for physician office visits, sometimes called GPCI. In the health care field, the legislation also adopts a recommendation from President Obama that reduces subsidies to high- income seniors by requiring them to pay a greater share of their part B and D premiums. This single change reduces spending by $31 billion in the next decade. It saves $13.4 billion in wasteful overpayments of exchange subsidies, similar to previous good government changes enacted by overwhelming bipartisan majorities and signed into law by the President, and repeals provisions in current law that hurt physician- owned hospitals. With regard to the Nation's primary welfare program, the legislation extends through September 30, 2012, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, TANF, which is set to expire on December 31st of this year. The TANF extension includes bipartisan, bicameral reforms to ensure that taxpayer funds are protected from abuse. Those reforms include improvements to program integrity, and closing the current strip club loophole so that welfare funds cannot be accessed at ATMs in strip clubs, liquor stores, and casinos. In California alone, nearly $4 million in State-issued cash benefits was withdrawn from ATMs in casinos between January 2007 and May 2010. Another $20,000 in benefits was withdrawn from ATMs in adult entertainment establishments. I think we can all agree that this reform makes sense for taxpayers and for those on welfare. Finally, the legislation takes two additional steps to better protect taxpayer dollars. First, it makes necessary changes to the additional child tax credit program by requiring the individual, or at least one spouse, to include a Social Security number on their tax return to claim the credit, just as you would have to do when filing for the earned income tax credit. This will reduce Federal spending by $10 billion in the next decade alone. Second, this legislation reduces Social Security overpayments by improving coordination with States and local governments, incorporating another recommendation from President Obama. The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act incorporates more than a dozen proposals that the President has either offered, supported, or has signed into law in one variation other another. In fact, more than 90 percent of the bill is paid for with such policies. The list of job-creating provisions and those that help families is almost too long to list, but let me highlight just a few. A bipartisan payroll tax cut for every working American that also protects Social Security; a bipartisan energy project, Keystone XL, that will create more than 100,000 jobs and is supported by both employers and unions; a bipartisan tax cut for small and large businesses to invest now in new machinery and equipment to grow their businesses and create jobs; bipartisan reforms to make sense of Federal regulations like boiler MACT, which will protect as many as 20,000 jobs; bipartisan health care reforms that will help ensure a strong health care industry; a bipartisan push for spectrum auctions that will unleash new growth and create new jobs in the technology sector; bipartisan reforms that help Americans find work faster, instead of just giving them an unemployment check. The list goes on and on but, in short, this bill is about jobs, jobs, jobs, creating jobs and helping Americans find a job. It's paid for, it is bipartisan, and it will help get our economy back on track. I strongly urge my colleagues to vote in favor of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP. I yield 1 minute to a distinguished member of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Brady).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to House Resolution 491, I call up the bill (H.R. 3630) to provide incentives for the creation of jobs, and for other purposes, and ask for its immediate consideration.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, at this time I would note that the Ways and Means Committee has held 16 different hearings or markups on provisions contained in this legislation. I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished chairman of the Health Subcommittee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Herger).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and to include extraneous material on the subject of the bill under consideration.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to a member of the Ways and Means Committee, the distinguished gentleman from Texas (Mr. Sam Johnson), who is an author of the reform to the refundable child tax credit.

Mr. CAMP. That is a helpful reminder, especially to those States that look to take advantage of how this legislation removes current bureaucratic barriers preventing them from doing that sort of screening and testing, if they so choose.

Mr. CAMP. I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation and seek time in opposition to the motion to recommit.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, this motion to recommit is a further illustration of the glaring differences in priorities between Republicans and Democrats. Republicans have brought a plan to the floor today that is about protecting taxpayers and creating American jobs. And instead of joining us in that important task, my Democratic friends are offering yet another politically motivated motion. In fact, one senior Democratic aide recently said to the press, and I quote, ``MTRs are all political.'' You can read it right here. My colleagues and the American people should not be fooled. They should not be distracted by these political games. Make no mistake. Our bill extends the payroll tax cut for every employee in this country. And if my friends on the other side of the aisle choose to vote against it, they are supporting a tax increase on every American who collects a paycheck. This motion contains a massive 10-year tax increase. It increases taxes on employers, on small businesses, on investors, the very people we need paying more paychecks, not more taxes. In fact, this exact provision has been defeated multiple times in the U.S. Senate by Republicans and Democrats alike in a bipartisan effort. Our bill is about strengthening our economy, getting Americans back to work through commonsense reforms to the unemployment insurance program. It will ensure American seniors and the disabled are protected by preventing massive cuts to doctors working in the Medicare program. And it will be paid for with fiscally responsible reforms, not job- killing tax hikes. I urge my colleagues, vote against this motion to recommit and vote for the underlying bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. If the distinguished minority leader had read the next paragraph of the letter to me by the Congressional Budget Office, she would have read that the bill in its entirety reduces the deficit by $1 billion. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert the entirety of the letter to me from the Congressional Budget Office into the Record. U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Washington, DC, December 9, 2011. Hon. Dave Camp, Chairman, Committee on Ways and Means, House of Representatives, Washington, DC. Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the staff of the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) have reviewed H.R. 3630, the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2011, as introduced on December 9, 2011. The attached tables provide CBO's and JCT's estimates of the legislation's budgetary effects. Table 1 presents a summary of the expected impact on deficits from changes in revenues and direct spending, along with estimated changes from reductions in existing caps on discretionary funding (those effects are subject to future appropriation actions). According to CBO's and JCT's estimates, enacting H.R. 3630 would change revenues and direct spending to produce increases in the deficit of $166.8 billion in fiscal year 2012 and $25.3 billion over the 2012-2021 period. Relative to discretionary spending projected under current law and assuming compliance with the current-law caps on discretionary appropriations for the next 10 years, CBO estimates that the proposed changes in discretionary funding caps under H.R. 3630 would lead to a reduction in projected discretionary spending of $26.2 billion over the 2012-2021 period (as shown in the bottom panel of Table 1). Table 2 provides detail on the changes in revenues and direct spending for the major provisions of the legislation. Enacting the bill would reduce revenues by $88.3 billion over the 2012-2021 period and reduce direct spending by $63.1 billion over that period, according to CBO's and JCT's estimates. Those changes are the budgetary effects that would be expected to occur directly from enactment of H.R. 3630, while proposed changes in spending subject to appropriation are contingent upon enactment of future legislation. Table 3 shows the estimated impact of H.R. 3630 under the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (S-PAYGO Act). Under that act, budget-reporting and enforcement procedures apply to changes in the on-budget deficit from changes in revenues and direct spending. Those procedures call for automatic reductions in certain direct spending programs if there are positive balances in either the 5-year or 10-year compilations of pay-as-you-go budgetary effects. Following the specifications in the S-PAYGO Act, which allows for an adjustment to reflect the continuation of current rates on the payments to physicians under Medicare, CBO estimates that on-budget changes in direct spending and revenues subject to the pay-as-you-go considerations would increase deficits by $136.6 billion over the 2012-2016 period and would reduce deficits by $4.0 billion over the 2012-2021 period. H.R. 3630 would direct the Office of Management and Budget to exclude from its scorecard of balances under the S-PAYGO Act any estimated deficit reduction for the 10-year period spanning fiscal years 2012 through 2021. The bill also specifies that the estimate submitted for printing in the Congressional Record should reflect three types of effects that are not included under the S-PAYGO Act: off-budget effects, projected changes in discretionary spending from changes in the caps on new appropriations, and estimated changes in net income of the National Flood Insurance Program (but those adjustments are not included in Table 3 because the provision has not been enacted into law). If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be pleased to provide them. Sincerely, Robert A. Sunshine (For Douglas W. Elmendorf, Director). Enclosure.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP. This bill will strengthen our economy and help get Americans back to work by lowering the tax burden for middle class families and job providers. It prevents massive cuts to doctors working in the Medicare program to protect American seniors and those with disabilities, providing more stability in the doctor payment schedule than there has been in a decade. It adopts 12 of the President's legislative initiatives, which represents the bipartisan cooperation Americans are demanding, and includes an increase in Medicare premiums for the wealthy, as the President requested. It will extend Federal unemployment programs to 5 million Americans, those still struggling after the President's failed stimulus program. I'm still waiting for the 3.5 million jobs that were promised and the 6 percent unemployment rate. But we ensure in this bill that they get the assistance they need. And under this bill, more than 1 year of benefits will be available. It's fully paid for with spending reductions, spending cuts, not job- killing tax hikes. Commonsense reforms and savings in this bill include things like actually requiring those who receive an unemployment check to look for work and get a GED if they don't have a high school diploma, require undocumented workers who are seeking refundable--that's cash--tax credits to actually have a valid Social Security number, just like is required in the earned income tax credit. And the bill freezes pay for Members of Congress and other nonmilitary government personnel. This legislation also protects critical programs by reducing the Federal tax subsidies that go to wealthier Americans. We put an end to millionaires and billionaires receiving unemployment benefits and food stamps, saving over $20 million. We also adopt the President's plan to reduce subsidies to high-income seniors by requiring them to pay a greater share of their Medicare premium. That reduces Federal spending by $31 billion. All told, this bill incorporates more than a dozen proposals the President has either offered, supported, or has signed into law in one variation or another. In fact, 90 percent of this bill is paid for with those policies. I urge support of this legislation. This bill is about strengthening our economy, helping Americans find a job. It doesn't add one dime to the debt. It is bipartisan, and it will help get our economy back on track. Please vote ``yes'' for this bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I reserve a point of order.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent for Mr. Upton to control 15 minutes of the time.

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise).

Mr. CAMP. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the distinguished gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. Biggert).

Mr. CAMP. I object.