Shelley Capito

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to ask that we take a moment to honor Danny Adkins, who lost his life while giving rescue support to the flooded areas of Raleigh County, West Virginia. In the early hours of March 13, 2010, Danny Adkins was part of a five-man crew of volunteer firefighters from Glasgow, West Virginia called upon to aid rescue crews in Raleigh County. Trained in swift water rescue, Danny's courageous efforts saved the lives of many before his boat capsized and he was swept away by the rapid floodwaters. After six days of searching by nearly a hundred volunteers, Danny's body was found Friday, March 19, 2010. Danny's courage and selflessness are known by all that knew him. He has been a hero to so many and will be missed dearly. I take this time to remember Danny Adkins. He gave his life to save others. I want to thank all firefighters throughout West Virginia that sacrifice so much for their communities, with a special thank you to Glasgow Volunteer Fire Chief Marty Blankenship, Fire Captain Jay Slack, and the fellow firefighters of the Glasgow Volunteer Fire Department. My deepest thoughts and prayers are with his two sons, Devin and Ethan, his daughter, Allyssa, and his girlfriend, Bobbie Evans.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, for a moment let's think of this bill as a blanket, a blanket of health care legislation that may be draped across America and its population in the coming years. Unfortunately, this blanket is woven not from all hands working together, but is the handiwork of strong-arm, political deal-making, and, perhaps most disheartening, a resistance to listen to the American people. Its cloth has been cut behind closed door, and its color is tinged by partisan hands. It is too short in some areas, and too long in others, woven to cover the winners and to leave out the losers. Once this blanket of legislation is laid out, those that huddle beneath it will find that it does not provide the real health care reform they need for their families. In fact, it will become a wall of government between them and their doctor. Its huge holes will not protect the cold wind of job loss, new taxes, government bureaucracy, and increased health care costs. And though we hear of coming patches in the future, in all likelihood they will be made of the same flimsy fabric of broken promises. All of America will feel the weight of this uncomfortable burden. The real cost of the $2.6 trillion bill will only increase in the future. States like mine, West Virginia, will feel the weight in huge budget shortfalls caused by millions of dollars in unfunded mandates. States must balance their budgets and will be forced to absorb the massive increase in Medicaid spending demanded by this bill. But, the full burden will be paid by those who enjoyed this beautiful spring day, playing outside in backyards across America. Little do they know as they play that we are on the cusp of burdening them with generational debt. The Speaker and her team will drape this legislation across citizens, ignoring their pleas against it. And America will again shake its head in disbelief and ask how Washington can turn a deaf ear and be so disconnected from the American people. If we stand here in obedience to our purpose, the Congress will be an effective representation of the people of the United States. We should stop this unfortunate endeavor, take a step back and listen, listen to the heartbeat of America, the beat that yearns for true health care reform, the beat that asks for bipartisan government committed to solving America's problems, the beat that asks that we put America's families first. America deserves this. America deserves to be heard.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to express my utter disbelief and disappointment at the path the Democrat leadership has chosen for health care reform. Never, ever in my 14 years of legislating have I ever been asked to vote for a bill that will ``be fixed later.'' We don't even know what this bill costs--well, in excess of $1 trillion--or what backroom deals will wind up being in this bill after the vote. It is an absolute affront to the integrity of this Congress that we are being asked to put a signature on the bottom of a blank page. Now, we've all seen team building exercises where one person stands blindfolded on the edge of a table and is asked to fall back into the arms of their colleagues. Well, that's what the Speaker is asking this Congress to do, to fall backwards from this precipice with the promise that all will be well. My constituents deserve more than a mere promise of trust. We should not be asked to be voting on a bill that will affect one-sixth of our economy and touch every single American's life without knowing what is in the bill. Well, the Speaker knows what's in the bill, and she doesn't want anybody to vote on it. Americans deserve health reform, but they deserve it the right way.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, as we mark the anniversary of the so-called ``stimulus plan,'' Americans want to know: Where are the jobs? In my home State of West Virginia, the White House predicted that their $800 billion stimulus package would create 20,000 jobs. Sadly, we have actually lost over 10,000 jobs. That's bad news for many families. If that's not bad enough that the so-called ``stimulus'' isn't living up to its promises of new jobs, it's even worse that the policies of this administration are actually contributing to job loss in States like mine. Cap-and-trade puts an economic target on the backs of States like mine, which results in job loss. Meanwhile, the President's EPA has continued to hold up mining permits across Appalachia, creating an unprecedented sense of uncertainty that is already costing mining jobs and is threatening thousands more. Further, the EPA is threatening to or is pushing to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, which will undoubtedly cost more thousands of jobs in our State. Mr. Speaker, my constituents may have thought their tax dollars were going to be used to fund the stimulus to result in jobs, but I join them in asking: Where are the jobs?

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor Nancy Shobe on her 41 years of service to the constituents of Buckhannon, West Virginia, and to congratulate her on her upcoming retirement. Nancy has served as the secretary to the mayor, computer systems manager, human resource manager, recorder, treasurer, and acting mayor during her 41 years of service to the city of Buckhannon. She's served as president of the Municipal Clerks and Recorders Association and was selected as Clerk of the Year in 1997 and 1998. She also received a Certificate of Highest Merit from West Virginia University's Local Government Leadership Academy. And most recently, she was awarded the Quiet Strength Award for her outstanding leadership. Nancy's leadership was proven during the difficult times after the Sago Mine disaster. Being the closest incorporated city to the Sago Mine, the city of Buckhannon was able to provide grief counseling for the families of the Sago miners, largely due to her efforts. She has proven herself to be a true leader and a dedicated public servant whose positive impact in our community will be felt for many years to come. I join with the residents of Buckhannon, West Virginia, in commending Nancy Shobe for her outstanding leadership and commitment over the past 41 years, and I urge my colleagues to join me in honoring her.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. I want to thank the ranking member, my good friend from Alabama, for yielding me the time. I would also like to thank him for his leadership on our committee over the past year. I rise today in support of the Republican substitute. My colleagues have a choice today: Do they want to perpetuate bailouts and continue to put taxpayers at risk or will they support the Republican substitute that ends bailouts? There are two features of this bill I'm going to address. The substitute creates a new chapter of the bankruptcy code. This new section, chapter 14, will allow for an expedient resolution of failing firms as there will be trained personnel who have the necessary skills to ensure an efficient resolution. This is not chapter 7 or chapter 11, as in the discussion we had in the committee, as my friends on the other side of the aisle have asserted; although, the bill does not prohibit a nonbank financial firm from pursuing these chapters if they so wish. There is no taxpayer-funded bailout fund in our amendment. It is straightforward for all market participants. If you take on too much risk and fail, then you go through an expedited bankruptcy. The taxpayers will not pick up the tab. This is fair to all market participants and it's fair to the taxpayers, and I urge my colleagues to join us in ending the bailouts. Another important section of the Republican substitute is that we address reforms to the GSEs, Fannie and Freddie. While there may not be consensus on the reforms proposed, this body must have an honest discussion about the future of these two entities and what role, if any, government should play. After all, a major component of the financial crisis was the failure of these two entities. To ignore their reform in a financial reform package is irresponsible. I would urge support for the Republican substitute. This is the financial reform package that we need.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Chair, I would like to say facts are facts. We are, unfortunately, suffering some of the highest unemployment in a generation. These are real people who are losing real jobs, and we want to help them in their housing issues. I support the gentlewoman's amendment. I would like to say that, in our hearing, we learned that the servicers and the banks were having some lapses, but we found also that the borrowers were having some lapses as well in terms of providing full documentation, in terms of responding to the lenders and to the servicers. So I would encourage the gentlewoman, as we move through this process, to maybe expand the transparency of the information so that we can see the full program not just from the servicer's side or from the bank's side but also from the borrower's side, too, and see where their lapses may be as well. With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to my colleague on the Financial Services Committee, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hensarling).

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Chair, I would like to speak in opposition to the bill, but I would like to talk about the manager's amendment as well. But before I get into the manager's amendment, I would like to reinforce my opposition to the bill in its entirety because of the permanent bailout fund that is created, the continuation of bailouts, the implied government guarantee in the financial marketplace, and the way that taxpayers are placed on the hook potentially for billions, if not trillions, of dollars to bail out failed nonbanks. But specifically I would like to talk about the two parts of the manager's amendment that were added without specific discussion by the committee, to my knowledge, and it also goes to a larger point. We've labeled this bill TARP II. This goes back to TARP I and using TARP funds to fund things that the TARP money was not intended to go for. I voted against the TARP funding in the first place. And now in the manager's amendment we have another $4 billion in existing TARP funds going to unproven foreclosure relief programs; $3 billion to reinstate a 1975 program, the Emergency Homeowners' Relief Act, to provide emergency mortgage relief. We just had a hearing in our committee this week on the Making Homes Affordable plan, the administration's plan, that in our opinion, I think, across the board in a bipartisan way is a bust. It has not met with much success, and it has murky, if uncertain, guidelines attached to it. So I think in this case strapping an unemployed homeowner with more debt is not the answer. Congress needs to support policies that create jobs and do not perpetuate any more bailouts. The other part of this amendment adds another $1 billion for the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. This program is a costly bailout for lenders and speculators. This program also could have the unintended consequences of making foreclosure a more attractive option for lenders, thereby compounding the problem. We've already committed in two separate times $6 billion to the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, and this adds another billion. I think we also need to consider that this program of the $4 billion allocated to it in 2008, only 25 percent of the funds are even out the door. What is adding another billion dollars going to do and when can those funds actually get out the door? And of the $1.9 billion allocated in January of 2009, not one dollar has made it through HUD's cumbersome bureaucracy. I object to the fact that this was added onto the manager's amendment on a very complicated, thousand-page bill, but it also adds two additions on here that I believe were part of the reason that the bill has been held up through this week and part of the reason it was held up yesterday; it was to satisfy certain interests in this House, and I think we need to have them discussed in front of the whole committee and discussed in front of the whole House.

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Chair, I rise to claim time in opposition, although I am not entirely opposed to the gentlelady's amendment.

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Chair, the gentlelady's amendment deals with the Making Home Affordable program, which has been in effect for most of 2009. I think it is important to note that the Department of the Treasury is already collecting some of this data. But I would like to take this opportunity to express my continued concern, as the gentlelady expressed hers, with the loan modification programs in general. Earlier this week, the House Financial Services Committee held a hearing in which there was bipartisan frustration with these programs. Rolled out under heralded proclamations that they would help 7 million to 9 million struggling homeowners, to date the loan modifications have helped only a fraction of that. I have serious concerns that the administration has overpromised on these programs and has unfairly raised borrowers' expectations. Furthermore, we have learned that many of the trial modifications are not being processed with complete documentation. Lack of documentation was one of the main contributors to the foreclosure problem in the first place. JPMorgan Chase recently disclosed that in November close to 25 percent of their trial modifications failed to make the first payment, and that nearly 50 percent of the borrowers failed to make all three of the first three payments. Furthermore, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston cites that 30 to 45 percent of borrowers who receive modifications end up in default within 6 months. Clearly, we need more transparency in this program. We also need to find a way to make the goals of the program work to help those who are having difficulty--who are suffering from unemployment or from the real estate collapse in their areas or who are unable to meet their obligations. All of us hear from constituents every single day who are struggling, but this program, Making Home Affordable, obviously has great lapses and great challenges. With that, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Chair, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. I would like to thank the ranking member and my former Chair for yielding this time to me and thank him for his leadership on every important debate. My colleagues, our friends on the other side of the aisle would have us believe that the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act derives its name from the assumption that the underlying text will prevent Americans from the impact of future economic disturbances like the one we experienced last fall. If only that were true. Instead, this bill is nothing more than a continuation of the bailout mentality that has put trillions of taxpayer dollars on the hook for the mistakes of Wall Street. Are we finally putting an end to the bailout culture on this bill? No, we are not. Rather than ending the bailouts, this legislation institutionalizes them. Instead of protecting taxpayers, this bill puts them at further risk. The Democrats' bill will grant authority to both the Treasury and the Federal Reserve to create a new $200 billion fund to finance future bailouts of the big banks and financial institutions. Who will be paying for this fund? The consumers. Furthermore, if there is another market-wide disturbance like the experience last fall, it will be the taxpayers who will be called upon to pick up the tab. Unfortunately, the chairman's bill also fails to put an end to ``too big to fail.'' If certain institutions are too big to fail, then that means that the rest are too small to save. This will no doubt continue the troubling practice of government's picking winners and losers in the marketplace. This bill will do nothing more than set up an unlevel playing field that penalizes consumers, puts taxpayers' dollars at risk, and restricts the flow of credit at a time when our small businesses need it most. Republicans on the House Financial Services Committee have put forth a better proposal. We believe it's time to truly put an end to the bailouts. Business decisions have consequences, and Wall Street needs to know that taxpayers will not be there to help them pick up the pieces of their risky business practices. Instead of permanent bailouts, we propose a new chapter of the bankruptcy code capable of ensuring the orderly unwinding of failed firms.

Mrs. CAPITO. We would give bankruptcy judges the authority to stay claims by creditors and counterparties to prevent runs on troubled institutions, alleviating potential panics if a large institution faces trouble. Under this proposal, all market participants, large and small, will know the rules of the game. If they take on too much risk, they'll face bankruptcy just like any other failed business. We'll also protect consumers with increased investment fraud enforcement. We'll monitor systemic risk through improved coordination between regulators. Yet, most importantly, we'll provide market certainty by making it clear to Wall Street that no firm is ``too big to fail.'' I urge my colleagues to say ``no'' to bailouts and oppose the underlying bill.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to inform my colleagues of the pending retirement of Marshal J.C. Raffety from not only his position as United States Marshal for the Northern District of West Virginia, but from an exceptional career in law enforcement that spans the past five decades. Specifically, on January 1, 2010, after nearly eight years of service as U.S. Marshal, J.C. will graciously relinquish his duties and begin his life anew as a private citizen of the State of West Virginia. Raffety will leave this post with an outstanding legacy of achievement. During his tenure, Marshal Raffety supported the establishment of the Northern District's Mountain State Fugitive Task Force, which has components located in Clarksburg, Martinsburg, and Wheeling, West Virginia. This Task Force, comprised of local, State and Federal law enforcement agencies, is responsible for the apprehension of violent fugitive offenders. In addition, this Task Force participates in Operation FALCON, Federal And Local Cops Organized Nationally, an annual, nationwide fugitive round-up that relies on the combined efforts of Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies and departments. Under Raffety's capable leadership, the Northern District of West Virginia's efforts involving Operation FALCON netted the arrests of hundreds of fugitives from justice, and stands today as a shining example of effective interagency cooperation and coordination. Additionally, very early into his appointment, Marshal Raffety was selected to serve on the then-USMS Director's Advisory Committee, a testament to his decades of training and experience in the Federal, State, and local law enforcement communities. President George W. Bush appointed Raffety to the position of U.S. Marshal on March 13, 2002. Prior to that, J.C. served as the Chief of Police for the city of Buckhannon, West Virginia, for approximately two years. During his tenure, Chief Raffety promoted the established concept of community policing and instituted meaningful administrative reforms. Additionally, he strengthened ties with the students and administrators of West Virginia Wesleyan College and enhanced the Neighborhood Watch Program in Buckhannon. Before his service as Chief of Police in Buckhannon, Raffety spent a remarkable 32-year career with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI, which began in 1966 when, following high school graduation at the age of 18, he relocated to Washington, DC, and began working for the FBI as a GS-2 Clerk. While employed at the FBI, J.C. attended night school full-time towards the attainment of his college degree. After a 2-year break in service to complete his undergraduate education, Raffety was reinstated to the FBI in 1970, and attended the FBI Academy at Quantico, Virginia. Early in his career, J.C. served as an FBI Special Agent in Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Erie, Pennsylvania, where his investigative efforts focused on organized crime, racketeering, and public corruption. He later served as a Supervisory Special Agent at FBI Headquarters in Washington, DC, assigned to the Criminal Investigative Division, Organized Crime Section. Subsequently, in 1983, Raffety was assigned to the Clarksburg, West Virginia Resident Agency, and later served as Supervisory Senior Resident Agent for that office, a position he held until his retirement in 2000. Among the highlights of his impressive record in West Virginia, J.C. served as the lead case agent in the 1995-1997 West Virginia Mountaineer Militia investigation, which resulted in the convictions of militia members engaged in a domestic terrorism plot targeting the FBI's Criminal Justice Information Services, CJIS, Center in Clarksburg, as well as the Internal Revenue Service, IRS, and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, BATF, facilities in West Virginia's eastern panhandle. I am pleased to have had this opportunity to call to the attention of my colleagues the extraordinary accomplishments of J.C. Raffety. I admire his idealism and lifelong commitment to his community, State, and country. I join his wife, Cindy, his two children and two grandchildren, and the grateful citizens of West Virginia in thanking J.C. for his life of service, and in wishing him continued success as he enters this new chapter of his life. Congratulations, Marshal Raffety, on a job well done!

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor John L. Ray, in celebration of the 100 years since the Charleston Public Library opened in 1909. John V. Ray Sr., a library patron, held the position as president of the library board for more than 30 years, where he helped write the Kanawha County Public Library Act that would see its way through the West Virginia Legislature. This guaranteed that libraries would be granted a share of the property taxes which came to the Kanawha County Board of Education, the Kanawha County Commission and the city of Charleston. It was a key piece of legislation that kept a stream of funding for libraries. His son, John L. Ray followed in family tradition when he took over as Kanawha County Public Library board president in 1988. An avid library supporter himself, John had a vision for the county and what purpose libraries would serve. His plan brought new buildings to Cross Lanes, Sissonville, a combined public/school library at Riverside High, and a designed replacement for the downtown Charleston library. An institution that serves all people, libraries remain a beacon for communities because of the more than twenty years John has spent as board president. He led the rapid development as card catalogs were replaced by electronic catalogs. He came up with a long-range plan that would bring new buildings to the county to ensure that libraries could continue to serve their public function. It is an honor to recognize John L. Ray. With his hard work and leadership, we are able to celebrate 100 years since the opening of the Charleston Public Library. It says great things about West Virginia to have people like you represent our great state.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor Arno Hott, who is stepping down from the Hampshire County Commission on Aging after 35 years; 25 served as board chairman. Arno Hott was born in Kirby, WV, on November 13, 1924. On his 85th birthday we honor him for all the work he has done for Hampshire County. His wife, Dorothy, and four children should be extremely proud as Arno was one of the first board members on the Commission on Aging. What started with just three employees has grown to employ 110 people, making it among the top ten employers in Hampshire County. We honor him for his time with the Commission on Aging, but his service to Hampshire County reaches much further. A graduate of Shepherd College, Arno taught in Hampshire County Schools for 36 years. He is very active with the community choir, the county fair, as well as the Ruritan Club, where he has been a member for 50 years. An instrumental part in starting a day care for seniors, Arno's involvement in the community has benefited so many and it is only right he receive acknowledgement in return for all his public service. Having received the Distinguished West Virginian Award from four different Governors as well as the Outstanding West Virginian Award, it is an honor to recognize Arno Hott. It says great things about West Virginia to have people like you representing our great State.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition because this bill puts crushing debt on everyone and puts the government between a woman and her doctor.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to voice the concerns of my constituents who believe the Speaker's trillion-dollar 1,990-page bill is simply the wrong solution for West Virginia's families. We were told that under the President's plans, those who like their health care would be able to keep it. Well, we now know that is simply not true. It is certainly not true for the 72,000 West Virginians on Medicare Advantage who will see the program slashed by $170 billion under this plan. Consider one of my elderly constituents from Dunbar, West Virginia, who called just today. She relies on the enhanced benefits of Medicare Advantage to cover her rheumatoid arthritis and her diabetes. She suffered a stroke, a brain aneurysm, and she is on more than a dozen prescriptions. She relies on these services, and she fears that this bill will put them at risk. Sadly, she is right, because this bill will change her health care. Mr. Speaker, we need health care reform, but we can do better than this.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor John Overington as he becomes the first member to reach 25 years of service in the West Virginia House of Delegates. First elected to represent the 55th District of West Virginia in 1984, John has spent the past 25 years working tirelessly to address the needs of Berkeley County. He has become revered for his public service while successfully bringing results through his leadership and involvement with numerous community organizations. Working on many vital pieces of legislation, John has assured that the best interests of West Virginia are at the forefront. John is involved in countless organizations and has received several recognitions for his efforts, including Martinsburg-Berkeley County Chamber of Commerce Outstanding Chairman Award in 1988. I know his involvement in the Bedington Ruritan Club is very special to him, where his passionate support has helped achieve fellowship, goodwill, and community service in the area. It is an honor to congratulate such a distinguished public servant for his years of service and contribution to Berkeley County and the State of West Virginia. I'm proud to call John a friend and fellow West Virginian.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, the American people want health care reform, but they want the right kind of reform. They want to know that we are not going to raise taxes on job creators when the economy is just coming out of a recession. They want to know that we are not going to change the health care that they have now. They want to know that Medicare will be there for them. As a mother of three, I can remember nights when one of our children would have a cold and I would put my ear to their chest to hear the rattle or to hear if they were developing croup. And that is what we have been doing with this health care reform. The Republicans have been putting their ears to the chest of the American people to find out what they want. And what they want, they want reform the right way, not a $1 trillion plan that will lead to uncertainty and that will have certain people lose their health care. We need to do health care reform, but we need to do it the right way.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Thank you. I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee. She has been an advocate for health care but also commonsense health care. I think that's what we're facing here today. We're looking at a bill that Speaker Pelosi has put before this body. We've already heard that it's 1,990 pages. I heard it weighs 20 pounds. It just defies logic that anybody can honestly say that they know each and every thing that is in this bill. For those of you who know Washington, who know what can happen, I think that would raise some serious questions--it certainly does in my mind--but in your mind as to what are in the far reaches of this bill. I would like to talk a little bit about women and health care because being a Member of Congress, a woman Member of Congress, we have certain duties, but we have so many other duties, like women across this country, that when we come into Washington, like many of us did today, we still have a little bit of our hearts or a lot of our hearts at home with our families, with our children, with our husbands, with our parents, with our siblings because we're the nurturers. We're the ones who, as women, oversee the health care in the family. We're the ones who, when the babies are little and they're coughing at night, put our ears to their chests to see if they're having some respiratory issues, and I think we're the ones that, as we become the sandwich generation, much like I am--I have grown children and elderly parents--that we're the ones that our parents come to to help them get to the appointments, fill their medications, help them with the forms, make sure that things are going in the right direction when they can no longer depend on each other. I'm quite lucky. My parents are in their eighties, and they're extremely self-sufficient on their own. But someday they're going to need that help that I as a daughter and my sister and my brother will provide for them. In West Virginia, I found--just coming here today, it was astounding to me of the number of folks that just randomly approached me about knowing what is on the docket here, the Speaker's over 1,900-page $1 trillion health care bill, and people are concerned. I was in Wendy's having lunch today, and I met a woman. She asked me to come over and talk with her. She is 75 years old, quite remarkable, and her mother had died the day before. We have a great history of longevity in our State. She is very concerned about this bill because she feels that not only is the bill being balanced on almost $500 billion in cuts in Medicare and Medicaid, which will influence her health care, but she is very concerned about government bureaucracy making decisions for her health care. She is very concerned about the government getting in between her decisions and her doctor's decisions. Quite honestly, she was afraid of a rationing of care. Because she is 75 years old, is she going to get the same care she might have if she was 50 or if she was 25? These are the kinds of thoughts that are very real, and they were very real for her, as I talked with her over lunch. Then as I was going to get on my plane this afternoon, I was buying a bottle of water, and the lady behind the counter said, Well, you're going back to Washington, right? I said, Right, going back to Washington. She said, It's health care, right? I said, Right, it's health care. And this voice in the back of the room said, Don't mess with my health care. Again, her view was, she's not on Medicare yet, but she had parents that were. She is concerned about their Medicare, but her concern was government-run health care. She sees this bill as it is. It's a government reach into her health care, and she was very concerned. Then as I was coming back in from the airport, I had a man who asked me, Going to talk about health care, right? I said, Right. And he goes, Well, let me tell you, he said, If in any way that health care bill would leave a crack in the door for my taxpayer's dollars to go for funding of abortion, I am going to go on a rampage. He said, I can understand, and I want to give, and I want to help, but this was his line in the sand. So you can see that everybody has a different perspective, and the 1,900 pages that are in the Speaker's bill are causing great concerns on a whole lot of levels. I did some research on West Virginia women. Of West Virginia residents, 51 percent are women, and the 442,000 women in West Virginia who receive health care coverage through their employer, which is almost 60 percent of the women, I am concerned about them because they have health care that generally serves their needs. We need to go in and make sure we make adjustments, that we fill the cracks in the lack of access or coverage. But I am concerned and I think it's a real concern that the Speaker's bill is going to come in and force over 60 percent of the women who have coverage for their employers to be put into a government-run insurance program that they don't choose, is not of their own choosing. Then maybe if that's not what happens, then the insurance option that they have is going to be the one that the government panel says meets adequate coverage. Well, what does that mean? What does that mean to the 60 percent of the women covered through their insurance through their employer? I think we have to look at what this is going to do for small businesses. In our State of West Virginia, only 37 percent of small businesses who have less than 50 employees provide health insurance coverage as compared to over 95 percent of larger firms employing more than 50. We need to fill that gap. As Republicans, we've come together to find ways to fill the gap for small businesses, to make it affordable, make it available, make it accessible. But the bill that is created by Speaker Pelosi and those in the leadership does not do enough. What it does do is puts another tax on small business to provide that insurance. Lastly, I asked a lot of the women in my district what they really thought about the plan as they understand it, expanded government involvement in health care. Of the women polled, 54 percent said that they would not personally trade their coverage for a public plan; 56 percent disagreed that they would be best served by government-run health care; 75 percent have said they don't want significant changes in their own health care; and 64 percent of the women in West Virginia said that they prefer private insurance over the public option. These are women that are accessing the health care system not just for themselves, not just for their own families. They're accessing it for their parents. Many of them work in the health care system. They see how it's working. They see the changes that could be made, and they really are rejecting it, I think, out of hand. I know my colleagues will expand on this tonight. The women are rejecting the types of changes where government goes between you and your health care provider. I believe that is what has happened in this plan, not to mention the over $1 trillion price tag that's attached to this bill, which both men and women across the country know that this is going to be on the backs of their children and grandchildren, a legacy of debt and deficit that's going to be passed on. I would like to thank the gentlewoman from Tennessee and all of my colleagues for being here tonight. Those are some of the perspectives that I have. It's so interesting to me that in the brief time today that I was out among folks, how tuned in everybody is to this, how aware. Because health care is so personal. It's such an everyday thing for so many people that everybody has an opinion because they're basically living it. This isn't something they're seeing from afar or they're hoping happens or it's happening to their neighbor. It's happening in everybody's home in America, and people are standing up and saying how they feel about it, where the changes need to be made, and how they feel. Generally speaking, today the Speaker's 1,900-page bill, $1 trillion bill, got a big goose egg today because I did not run into one person who said, That sounds like the plan for me. Thank you.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. I thank Mr. Lynch and Mr. Jordan for their great descriptions of John Brown's raid and the importance to our Nation's history. I'd also like to thank Chairman Towns and Ranking Member Issa for bringing this resolution forward. In my home State of West Virginia, we're very proud of our rich history and heritage. We proudly boast that ours is the only State formed as a result of the Civil War when we seceded from Virginia and joined the Union to become the 35th State. In 1863, we were signed into our statehood very proudly by President Abraham Lincoln. Yet, as any good history teacher will tell you, the abolitionist movement in our State has roots deeper than the Civil War itself. This month, we are celebrating the 150th anniversary of John Brown's historic raid on Harpers Ferry, which is just a short distance from our Nation's Capital, which helped to ignite the abolitionist movement and led to the War Between the States. Our State motto is ``Mountaineers are Always Free,'' and it is those principles that guided John Brown into his controversial raid. I rise today to note this year's anniversary and also celebrate the full heritage and history of this West Virginia town, Harpers Ferry, which is located beneath the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains. Long before its first settlement, Harpers Ferry's natural beauty caught the attention of Thomas Jefferson, who stood above the confluence of the Shenandoah and Potomac Rivers and noted that the region's beauty was ``worth a voyage across the Atlantic.'' And I must say, its splendor is equally as captivating today as it was more than 220 years ago, particularly at this time of year when visitors, thousands of visitors, are now flocking to Harpers Ferry National Park to take in the beautiful autumn colors. Jefferson's fellow statesman George Washington was similarly impressed with the community's strategic location and in 1794 recommended that Congress designate Harpers Ferry, which was then in Virginia, as a site for a Federal Armory and Arsenal. With the establishment of the armory, the community grew into a bustling factory town, where John Hall created the first interchangeable parts for firearms. His inventions led to the mass production of thousands of muskets and rifles, many of which would supply Lewis and Clark on their journey of westward expansion. But as we all well know, it was John Brown's 1859 historic raid which truly established Harpers Ferry's place in our history. That summer, John Brown settled into a nearby farm in Maryland under the alias of Isaac Smith and laid plans to seize the armory and lead a revolt to spread across the South with hopes of ending slavery. As the gentleman from Massachusetts mentioned, on the night of October 16, 1859, 150 years ago, he gathered with his provisional army of 21 men and seized the town, taking the town's bridges, Halls Rifle Works, the Federal Armory and Arsenal, and several hostages. As the fighting continued, news of the revolt spread across the region until Lieutenant Colonel Robert E. Lee and Lieutenant J.E.B. Stuart ordered 90 marines to storm the engine house where John Brown and his men had taken refuge. Upon his capture, John Brown was tried and convicted of murder, conspiring to rebel, and treason. He was sentenced to death by hanging in another historic town just down the road from Harpers Ferry, in present-day Charles Town, where on the day of his death, in addition to what the gentleman said, he wrote, ``I am now quite certain that the crimes of this guilty land will never be purged away but with blood.'' Unfortunately, we now know that his words held true as it took the bloody and divisive struggle of the Civil War to finally bring freedom to a people long enslaved. John Brown's raid will forever be known as one of the seminal events which led to the Civil War. His death brought the slavery debate to the forefront of our Nation divided. In the North, Brown was considered a ``martyr,'' and in the South, he was a ``terrorist.'' Yet, regardless of how he may be revered in history, his bold actions helped lead the fight for freedom and the end of slavery. After once again proving its geographic importance during the Civil War, Harpers Ferry became an epicenter for the fight for equality and civil rights movement. It became the home to Storer College, an integrated institution to educate newly freed slaves, with the campus later serving as the site of the Nation's first Niagara Movement meeting. It was at that meeting where the scholar W.E.B. Du Bois delivered his address which led to the creation of the NAACP, an organization which this year celebrated its 100th anniversary. Mr. Speaker, as you can see, Harpers Ferry is a town rich in history, and it is only fitting that during the 150th anniversary of John Brown's raid, the Harpers Ferry National Park has held several commemorative events, particularly last weekend to recognize the sesquicentennial and remember the contributions made by those who have come before us. I simply call on the rest of my colleagues to support the passage of H. Res. 568, and I would also encourage those near-and-far Americans to visit Harpers Ferry and the surrounding area to share in the deep history and tradition that we have in our State of West Virginia that's also part of what we will be commemorating later, that is, the 150-year anniversary of the beginning of the Civil War here in our Nation.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight the concerns my constituents continue to raise in the ongoing health care debate. Rather than listening to me, let's listen to them in their own words. This is from a woman in Nitro: ``While I agree that changes are needed to today's system, I don't believe that a new government-run health insurance plan is the right solution. The government plan will shift costs to employers, which could force more and more businesses to stop offering benefits to their workers. I like my current coverage, and don't want to be forced into a government program.'' Or a quote from a gentleman in Scott Depot: ``Congress must not let government get between my family and my doctor. Please protect patient freedom, and expand our health care options with real reforms--focused on patients, not on politics.'' Or another quote from West Virginia: ``I see my country being spent into destruction and my daughter's and grandson's future being thrown away by reckless politicians. What in the world are they trying to do? Myself and other mothers that I am in communication with are watching with great interest to see what is going on with the public health care plan, which we can't afford.'' Yes, we want health reform, but we want a thoughtful, bipartisan approach that will result in solid reform.

Mrs. CAPITO

Mrs. CAPITO. Mr. Speaker, I have one question. Where are the jobs? We are now more than 7 months from passage of the so-called stimulus package, yet it is more apparent than ever that the bill has fallen woefully short. In my home State of West Virginia, the White House predicted that this legislation would create 20,000 jobs. Well, guess what? At this point, since February, the reality is that we have lost 13,000 jobs. Sadly, the stimulus isn't living up to its promise of job creation. Additionally, the policies of this administration are actually contributing to job losses in my State. Cap-and-trade legislation will put an economic target on the back of our States, States like mine. Meanwhile, the EPA has continued to hold up mine permits across Appalachia, creating an unprecedented sense of unease and uncertainty that's already costing us mining jobs and threatening thousands more. Mr. Speaker, my constituents deserve better now, and they certainly deserved better when we first debated this bill. I join them in asking: Where are the jobs?