David Dreier

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, let me say how much I appreciate the hard work and the very thoughtful remarks by my very good friend. Mr. Broun, Mr. Davis and Mr. Schiff have all outlined some of the very great challenges that have been faced with this amazing Spirit and Opportunity program. I, like my friend, Mr. Schiff, was 5 years ago there when this program began. And I will never forget when Dr. Charles Elachi, the director of the Jet Propulsion Laboratory about whom Mr. Schiff was just speaking, leaned to me and said, ``David, you know, I know this is scheduled to have a life span of 90 days, 3 months.'' He said, ``I suspect that it might just go a little longer than that.'' And here we are today marking the fifth anniversary of Spirit and Opportunity, named by two young students who came together. They had a contest to name them. And these very bright and thoughtful kids came forward and said they wanted to name them Spirit and Opportunity. And they have gone through an amazing 5 years, as Mr. Broun said so well, wind storms and all kinds of cold and great adversity, and yet they are still chugging along providing very important information back to us. Mr. Schiff talked about the days ahead, and now Opportunity is headed to that new massive crater Endeavour. And so we are going to continue to get more and more interesting information. These three gentlemen, Mr. Speaker, have just talked about what Spirit and Opportunity have gone through. I would like to take a moment to look at the context around which this whole issue is being considered, and that is the devastating economic times that we are facing right here in the United States of America. Obviously, first and foremost on our minds is getting our economy back on track, ensuring that people who are suffering greatly with foreclosures and job losses, and even worse in some instances, are able to have those needs addressed. And many of us have been working to try and put into place a strong, bold, dynamic and robust economic growth program that, interestingly enough, is modeled after the program that was put into place by the man who called for us to put a man on the Moon by the end of the decade in the 1960s. That, of course, was John F. Kennedy. And we are continuing to try and work for those kinds of growth policies. Now the reason I say that, Mr. Speaker, is that there are so many who would argue that, as we look at sort of the amorphous space program out there, why in the world are we investing resources on that when we have so many pressing challenges right here at home? And there are a couple of points that I think need to be made. First, when we were celebrating the landing of another great JPL program, the Phoenix, one of the great scientists got up and talked about the fact that throughout world history, every single developed nation has, in fact, regardless of what challenges they faced, always looked at the imponderable. They have always made risk to pursue the unknown. And I'm reminded, of course, that it was the great Queen Isabella who sold her jewels so that Christopher Columbus might have the opportunity to discover America. And so risk-taking is something even during adverse times we need to continue to pursue. And we can't ignore that, because we are the United States of America, the greatest nation the world has ever known. And that is why this is very important. Second, we need to also realize, Mr. Speaker, that there are very important gains that we as a society and as a world are able to glean from this very important work, whether it is in medical imaging, and I know Dr. Broun understands that, whether it is in dealing with environmental protection, whether it is dealing with cellular technology or global positioning systems, there are a wide range of things that have emanated from programs like Spirit and Opportunity that have dramatically improved the standard of living and quality of life of people here in the United States and around the world. And so it is in that context that I join in celebrating the work of our friends in the Jet Propulsion Laboratory and CalTech and all involved in this very important NASA research and effort that is going on. I thank both my friends for their hard work in their committee and for coming forward and allowing Mr. Schiff and me to consider this resolution. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise in support of this resolution which I authored with my California colleague, Mr. Schiff, to recognize the five-year anniversary of the landing of the Mars Exploration Rovers, Spirit and Opportunity. I also commend the individuals that contributed to the success of the missions. In particular, the great minds at the La Canada Flintridge-based Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), who designed and built the rovers, and whom I have the distinct honor to represent. JPL is managed by the California Institute of Technology (Caltech), and very ably led by JPL's outstanding director, Dr. Charles Elachi. Mr. Speaker, as you may recall, during the summer of 2003, NASA launched its Mars Exploration Rovers from Cape Canaveral Air Force Station in Florida. The rovers were an exciting addition to NASA's Mars Exploration Program, and their mission was to explore the surface of Mars for three months in search of clues to give scientists a peek into the planet's past. Specifically, the rovers were to determine whether Mars had ever contained environments with quantities of water sufficient to support life. After traveling more than a quarter million miles, Spirit and Opportunity successfully landed on Mars's surface on January 3, 2004 and January 24, 2004, respectively. Within their primary three-month mission time frame, the rovers successfully uncovered geological evidence indicating that a body of water once flowed through certain regions, and that early Mars was characterized by impacts from meteors, explosive volcanoes and subsurface water. In an amazing display of endurance, Spirit and Opportunity managed to maintain their operational status far beyond the three months that were expected, and continue to operate to this day, five years later. The rovers explored more than 21 kilometers of Mars's terrain, climbed hills, descended deep into large craters, survived dust storms and endured three brutal Martian winters. Their amazing missions continue to yield valuable information about the history of Mars and are symbolic of America's pioneering spirit. Mr. Speaker, while oftentimes the parts that are developed for our space missions are sent off never to be seen again, it is important to realize that the technology stays here at home where it continues to make important contributions to our lives. For example, NASA-sponsored work at facilities like JPL has resulted in the development of critical technologies that have been commercially applied in fields as far ranging as medical imaging, transportation, cellular telecommunications, supercomputing and environmental protection. In addition, these projects inspire our youth to pursue education in the STEM fields--science, technology, engineering and mathematics. And they provide well-paid, highly technical jobs for innovators and entrepreneurs throughout our country. In fact, the success of the Mars rovers is due to the contributions of many, including workers from all across the country--from Composite Optics in San Diego, California to BAE Systems in Manassas, Virginia. The footprints of NASA's many successes have been made as far away as our moon, the planet Mars and beyond. But its most important impact is here at home. The work being done at JPL and other facilities is spurring the innovations that create jobs and make our lives better. And it is inspiring new generations of innovators who will pursue the careers that will continue to keep the United States at the forefront of technological advancement. Mr. Speaker, I commend the men and women whose tireless work has made the Mars rovers' expeditions such a tremendous success, and I urge my colleagues to vote in support of this resolution.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I thank my friend for yielding. To paraphrase the late Admiral James Stockdale from his famous vice presidential debate of nearly 17 years ago, why are we here? I don't quite get this. I know there will be some who want to blame George Bush or any other Republican out there, but the fact of the matter is, for the first time in a long time, we have a Democratic President, a Democratic House of Representatives and a Democratic United States Senate, and yet we at this moment are dealing with the possibility of a government shutdown. I just don't quite comprehend this. The American people, as our Republican leader and my California colleague, the distinguished ranking member of the committee, have said, the American people are hurting. We know very well with the unemployment rate that just came through it today at 8.5 percent, a one-half percent increase over 8 percent, that there are a lot of people who are suffering. We know of individual stories, and I have got to tell you the most painful one for me was to hear of the father of three young teenagers who committed suicide out in California over this. So, we have a very, very difficult challenge ahead of us, and yet we are sitting here dealing with this issue and a massive increase in spending, which clearly the American people do not want. It is a policy that has failed. It failed throughout the 1930s. We know what needs to be done, Madam Speaker, for us to get our economy back on track. What we need to do is we need to follow the model that was put forward by John F. Kennedy in 1961, the model of Ronald Reagan in 1981, because those solutions have in fact succeeded in the past. And yet we know that massive increases in spending, as the rest of the world has learned, are not the answer for the future. I strongly support our effort to keep this spending as low as possible by supporting our motion to recommit.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I thank my very good friend and colleague. I've heard two Texans up here talking about not only the issue of ethics but also tax reform. And I'd like to take a few minutes to talk about a proposal that I put forward that I believe will go a long way towards dealing with a lack of compliance, which is an issue that we are regularly addressing, and something that there has been very little talk about, and that is the issue of economic growth. We've talked about saving our economy. We've talked about working towards recovery. But it seems to me, Mr. Speaker, one of the important things that we need to focus on is economic growth itself. And, frankly, if we had a tax code that is like the one that my friend, Mr. Burgess, was just talking about a little earlier, I think that many of the problems that we have with people who have not complied with the Tax Code would, in fact, be diminished. As my friend said, he's not accusing anyone of ethical violations as he's standing here, but we do know this: with a tax code that is as voluminous as it is, it encourages a lot of the behavior that we have. And I think what we need to do is simplify it. On the opening day of this Congress, I was privileged to introduce, as I did in the last Congress, what I call the Fair and Simple Tax Plan, F-A-S-T, which is FAST. And I think there is so much common sense to this. And I know that, having two very distinguished gentlemen from Texas, common sense is in great abundance in Texas. And I will admit it is, on occasion, lacking in my State of California. But remember, we've got common sense in California, but we have, on occasion, not enough common sense. But it seems to be very abundant in Texas, and even in North Carolina. I see my colleague from North Carolina here, and I think it's abundant there. But I do believe, Mr. Speaker, that as we look at a commonsense approach to deal with the issue of economic growth--which, again, should be a very important driving factor for us here because we're not simply talking about stemming the downturn, we're not talking about, you know, our attempt to recover. We need to have policies that create bold, robust economic growth, and we can do that. So let me take a moment, if I might, Mr. Speaker, and talk about the Fair and Simple Tax Plan. What it consists of is taking the six rates that we have today and it cuts that in half down to three rates. The first rate, which is the income on the first $40,000, would be a flat 10-percent rate. Then, for income between $40,000 and $150,000, the rate would be 15 percent. And the flat rate for income above $150,000 would be a 30-percent rate. Now, I know a lot of people say, ``Why don't we just do a clean, simple flat tax and have that be it?'' Well, there are a number of things and challenges around here, a number of areas that are really sacrosanct. People always talk about the need to deduct the interest on their home mortgage, right? When we talk about a flat tax, the red flag seems to go up and they say, ``What about the deductability of interest on home mortgages?'' Well, under the Fair and Simple Tax Plan--which, again, was introduced on the opening day--we maintained the opportunity for people on a single-page form to deduct the interest on their home mortgages. And what else is very important and sacrosanct to people, and that is to be able to make charitable contributions. So we maintained the deductability of charitable contributions. And one of the things that President Obama spoke here in this Chamber about last night was the issue of health care and the challenge that exists there. We all know that we need to take action. So the Fair and Simple Tax Plan includes a $15,000 exclusion so that people can purchase either direct health care or they can purchase insurance. And, again, it incentivizes them to do that. Then it deals with issues that have been heavily debated here. One of the things that people are concerned about regularly are jobs leaving the United States and going overseas. Our constituents talk about that with regularity. A lot of people make what I believe is a misplaced claim that somehow embarking on trade agreements, which simply open up new markets, that causes the flow of jobs out of the United States into other countries. Well, the fact is it's not trade agreements, Mr. Speaker, that do that. What it is is it's the fact that the United States of America has a tax, a tax on businesses, the job creators in this country, that is second only to Japan. And under the Fair and Simple Tax Plan, we slash that tax from 35 percent to 25 percent. Again, as you talk to those job creators out there, that would go a long way towards encouraging economic growth. And then the capital gains rate. Well, people say, ``What capital gains do we have today with this market downturn?'' We need to look long-term. We need to look at what we want. And we want greater economic growth and to reduce that top rate on capital gains from 20 percent to 15 percent rather than increasing it, as I believe action that would go a long way towards encouraging economic growth and it would help us deal with the flow of revenues that we will need for much of the spending that is taking place. And we all acknowledge, well, the stimulus package went way, way, way overboard with $800 billion and a thousand pages. We were passing that thing around as we were debating it the other day, those of us who could catch it and could throw it with 1,100 pages. The fact is we all recognize that infrastructure spending is essential, very, very important for the goods' movement and other things here. But we could do that for significantly less than the $800 billion that is in this so-called stimulus bill. So we need revenue to be generated, and I believe that slashing the top rate on capital gains, taking that rate on job creators, on businesses, from 35 to 25 percent, would go a long way towards creating economic growth, which, therefore, would create the flow of revenues that we need to meet a lot of these essential items that are out there. Mr. Speaker, the other thing that it does is that it completely eliminates the inheritance tax, the death tax, throws it out the window. We all know that for people who have to go to a funeral home and then deal with the Internal Revenue Service within a matter of days is a challenge. I have had to go through this. It's very painful. That tax is very, very punitive. It's forced people to have to sell businesses and others just to meet that tax obligation that is there. Right now that tax rate has been 45 percent, and it had been 55 percent. And I believe that if we could completely eliminate that, that would, again, create a tremendous opportunity for growth to take place. A lot of small businesses would be saved. And all of this is done within the context of a single-page form, throwing the complex code that we have out, and the taxpayers would have the option of going to this Fair and Simple Tax Plan. I think that that's the kind of creative proposal that we need to take on to deal with the challenge of economic growth, which I think should be priority number one as we seek to deal with the economic downturn that we have. I also want to say that on the overall issue of ethics, I'm very proud--there are a lot of people who have said on this issue that when we Republicans were in charge, we did next to nothing on it. Well, as my friend knows very well, when Republicans were last in charge, we put into place very, very strong--a very strong ethics reform package. We dealt with a lot of these issues, and it hasn't gotten the kind of attention that I believe we need to get. Why? Because people have constantly engaged in attacking Republicans. And, obviously, there has been corruption on both sides of the aisle. A very, very bipartisan thing, tragically, has been that corruption has existed on both sides of the aisle. But I do want to make sure that the record is clear that we, when we were in the majority, spent an awful lot of time addressing that issue, and we put into place with some bipartisan support, I think, very good ethics reform. But especially at this time--and my friend is absolutely right. We need to make sure that a good example is set for the American people because we are going through a tough time. The President made it so clear. His opening remarks last night were so on target, about the fact that people have sleepless nights, the fact that people are anguishing over this. This notion of a high school student opening that envelope and having to put that acceptance letter back into the envelope, as the President said so well here last night, is the kind of story we hear with great regularity. And I, the other day here on the floor, shared an even greater tragedy. A very good friend of mine told me that his 14-year-old son's best friend's father had just committed suicide because of the serious economic downturn that we have faced. And I've talked to a number of people, and the suicide rate has continued to climb as it relates to the economic challenges that we have. That's why I continue to believe that even though we've passed this so-called economic stimulus package--which, from my perspective, I hope and pray, we all hope and pray, that it brings us out of the downturn that we're going through right now. But, frankly, if one looks at history, it is proved to have failed. Now, in special orders, a number of us have been regularly quoting Secretary Morgenthau. Henry Morgenthau was the Treasury Secretary under Franklin Delano Roosevelt. And in 1939, Secretary Morgenthau was testifying before the House Ways and Means Committee. And in his testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee, he said the following--now, remember, this is Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Treasury Secretary. I've read the card so many times, I've got it now committed to memory. He said, ``We have tried spending money.'' Again, this is testimony before the Ways and Means Committee. ``We have tried spending money. We have spent more money than we have ever spent before. Now, after 8 years of this,'' the Roosevelt administration, ``we have an unemployment rate that is just as high today as it was when we started, and we have an enormous debt to boot.'' That's what the Secretary of the Treasury of Franklin Delano Roosevelt said in testimony in 1939 before the House Ways and Means Committee. I got to thinking about this the other day, and I believe that we should look to another Democratic President as our model for economic growth, that being John F. Kennedy. So, over the weekend, I started reading up about Douglas Dillon, who was the Treasury Secretary under John F. Kennedy. He put into place bold, robust, dynamic economic growth policies through tax cuts that took the top rate from 90 to 70 percent and had a capital gains reduction. And it unleashed tremendous growth, a surge in the flow of revenues in the Federal Treasury. Similarly, I was very honored to be elected to this Congress, as my friend said correctly, a long, long time ago. 1980 is when I was privileged to be elected, the same day that Ronald Reagan was elected to be President. And Ronald Reagan inherited a tremendous--a very, very difficult economic time. The unemployment rate was very, very high. Interest rates were approaching 20 percent. We had inflation very high. It was a very, very, very challenging time economically for our country. And what was it that was put into place, I should say not just a few weeks after he became President, as has been the case here, but after 6 months of going through a very deliberative process? We put into place in May of 1981 what was known as the Gramm-Latta budget package that reduced the rate of spending by the Federal Government by 17 percent. And in August of 1981, we put into place the Conable-Hance tax package, which reduced marginal rates and doubled the flow of revenues to the Federal Treasury through the decade of the 1980s. Yes, there was a great deal of spending--a lot of spending on defense, a lot of other spending that took place from this Congress-- but we still saw that surge in the flow of revenues to the Federal Treasury. So we have the ideological bags of the past. Secretary Morgenthau referred to the fact that they spent more money than they ever spent before, and yet they had an unemployment rate that was as high as when they started. And we had John F. Kennedy and Ronald Reagan, who has these bold, dynamic, robust marginal rate reduction packages that created a surge and flow of revenues to the Treasury by reducing marginal tax rates. That's what we should be doing today. And I think that using things like our fair and simple tax plan as a model for that would help us deal with the challenges that we have. I thank my friend for the hard work that he has put in on a wide range of projects. I'm pleased to sit with him in the leadership of this great institution. We meet regularly and sit next to each other in those meetings, and he always has a very, very insightful and thoughtful proposal on a regular basis. And I believe that it really stems from what I began talking about, and that is that Texas common sense. So I thank my friend for yielding.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information regarding earmarks I received as part of H.R. 1105, the Fiscal Year 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act: Division B Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: COPS Law Enforcement Technology Legal Name of Requesting Entity: City of Claremont, CA Address of Requesting Entity: 207 Harvard Avenue, Claremont, CA 91711 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $1.8 million to acquire necessary equipment for the Claremont police station and emergency operations center (EOC). The activities and use of Federal funds for this are consistent with the language authorized by PL 107-273, 116 Stat. 1758. This is the last year funding will be needed to complete this aspect of the program. The City of Claremont will provide $500,000 (22%) for the local cost share. Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Office of Justice Programs, Byrne Discretionary Grants Legal Name of Requesting Entity: County of Los Angeles Sheriff's Department Address of Requesting Entity: 47 Ramona Boulevard, Monterey Park, CA 91754 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $300,000 to help create ``Gang-Coplink,'' an artificial intelligence based software application, to enable Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies to more effectively share, integrate, search, and analyze information relating to gangs. Coplink is already utilized county-wide by all law enforcement agencies and provides accurate and timely crime information and crime analysis. Gang-Coplink will import the Los Angeles area Cal-Gang database for a new countywide gang intelligence analytical information system and will interact with the Regional Terrorism Information and Integration System (RTIIS) Coplink. The RTIIS also contains the record management system (RMS) data from the other police departments in the County as well as Federal law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI, ATF, DEA, U.S. Marshals Service, and Bureau of Prisons. $200,000 or 2/3 of the funding will be applied to storage hardware and $100,000 or 1/3 will be utilized for server hardware. This is consistent with the intended and authorized purpose of the OJP Byrne Discretionary grants. Division C Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Bureau of Reclamation, Water and Related Resources Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Inland Empire Utilities Agency Address of Requesting Entity: 6075 Kimball Avenue, Chino, CA 91710 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $5,000,000 for the Inland Empire Regional Water Recycling Project with 50% for purple pipe and 50% for storage tanks to produce 100,000 acre feet of new recycled water annually. The project is authorized in P.L. 108-361, Title 1, Section 103 (d)(3) and additional specific authorization is provided in P.L. 110-161, Sec. 210. The total project cost is $226 million. As is consistent with law, the federal share is capped at $20 million, which is less than 10% of the total cost of the project. Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Bureau of Reclamation, Water and Related Resources Legal Name of Requesting Entity: San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority Address of Requesting Entity: 1720 West Cameron Ave., Suite #100, West Covina, California, 91790 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $3,500,000 for the San Gabriel Basin Restoration Fund to continue the design, construction, and operation of water projects to contain and treat the spreading groundwater contamination in the San Gabriel and Central Water Basins. The San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority was established by California State law under SB1679 in 1993 to develop, finance and implement groundwater treatment programs in the San Gabriel Basin and act as a clearing house for federal funds that have been appropriated for these programs. The project is authorized in P.L. 106-554 and this request is consistent with the intended and authorized purpose of the Bureau of Reclamations Water and Related Resources account. The current authorization ceiling for the Restoration Fund has yet to be reached, with roughly $7,000,000 yet to be appropriated. The San Gabriel Basin Water Quality Authority will provide a minimum of a 35% cost share which will come directly from the Water Quality Authority. Division D Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Small Business Administration Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Fairplex Address of Requesting Entity: 1101 West McKinley Avenue, Pomona, CA 91768 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $300,000 for the construction of the Fairplex Trade and Conference Center, an 85,000 square foot, state-of-the-art conference and exhibition center, complete with broadband connectivity, campus-wide wireless integration as well as satellite two-way communications geared to attracting and benefiting small businesses. The project is sited in the country's third largest non-port Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) and will provide the ability to display and demonstrate goods and services to international markets via established channels with the local economic council and the areas universities. 100 % of the funds will be utilized for ongoing construction of the center. The majority of the total cost of the project is from non-federal sources including Fairplex (a non-profit organization), the City of Pomona, Los Angeles County, private donations and competitive grants. This project is consistent with the mission of the Small Business Administration. Division E Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: EPA STAG Water and Wastewater Infrastructure Project Legal Name of Requesting Entity: City of Arcadia, California Address of Requesting Entity: 240 West Huntington Drive, Arcadia, CA 91066 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $500,000 for the cities of Arcadia and Sierra Madre for their Joint Water Infrastructure Projects. Arcadia's project will provide for the finalization of the design and a share of the construction cost for the Baldwin Reservoir Rehabilitation Project. Approximately, $50,000 is for design finalization; and the remaining $200,000 for a portion of the construction cost of the project. For Sierra Madre's projects, approximately $150,000 will be for the design of a Water Supply Well to replace an existing well with a new high capacity well, and $100,000 for the replacement of undersized water transmission and distribution pipelines to improve water reliability. Each city will provide a 45% local match to the 55% EPA STAG funding, as required. Division F Requesting member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)--Health Facilities and Services Legal Name of requesting entity: San Antonio Community Hospital Address of requesting Entity: 999 San Bernardino Road, Upland, CA 91786 Description of request: Provide an earmark of $761,000 to create a new cardiac catheterization laboratory using digital imaging for cardiac and vascular diagnosis and intervention. The cost of three new cardiac catheterization and cardiovascular imaging and intervention machines is approximately $2.8 million. 100% of the funding will help purchase one of the new machines, which costs $989,895. San Antonio Community Hospital will provide the remaining 24% of the cost of this machine. These funds will be generated from community support through donations and from operating income. This request is consistent with the intended and authorized purpose of the Health Resources and Services Administration account. Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)--Health Facilities and Services Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Methodist Hospital of Southern California Address of Requesting Entity: 300 W. Huntington Drive, Arcadia, CA 91007 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $904,000 for construction of the new patient tower project. Approximately $768,000 will be used for equipment and IT, including $335,000 for ultrasound machines, $114,000 for MRSA detection, $106,000 for IT hardware and software and $213,000 for IT equipment. The remaining $136,000 will be used for construction. Hospital reserves and debt financing will fund $125 million of the patient tower project. The build-out and equipping of the Emergency Department depends on grants and philanthropic support from the community. A fund-raising campaign to raise $25 million was launched with $24 million in gifts and pledges received to date. This request is consistent with the intended and authorized purpose of the Health Resources and Services Administration account. Division I Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: HR 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Buses and Bus Facilities Legal Name of Requesting Entity: City of Monrovia, CA Address of Requesting Entity: 415 S. Ivy Avenue, Monrovia, CA 91016 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $237,000 for the Station Square Transit Village bus layover and park and ride project. 100% of the funds will be used to acquire property for the bus layover facility and prepare plans for its construction as well as providing adequate pedestrian access to the site. This request is consistent with the intended and authorized purpose of Buses and Bus Facilities funds. The City of Monrovia will provide the 20% local match for this project. Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Interstate Maintenance Account Legal Name of Requesting Entity: City of Rancho Cucamonga, CA Address of Requesting Entity: 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $712,500 for the construction of the I-15/Base Line Road Interchange improvements project. 100% of the funding will be used for construction of the interchange which includes two new bridge structures for the southbound on/off ramps, a loop ramp for westbound Base Line Road to southbound I- 15, and the widening of the on and off ramps on the east side. The project also improves East Avenue to provide curb, gutter, and sidewalks, as well as the widening of the Base Line Road to provide two left turn lanes for eastbound Base Line Road to the northbound I-15. This request is consistent with the intended and authorized purpose of the Federal Highway Administration Interstate Maintenance Discretionary Program. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is providing over 70% of the total cost of the project, as a local match, through the following funding sources: $9,800,000 from Development Impact Fees; $9,200,000 from the Rancho Cucamonga Redevelopment Agency; $9,800,000 from Measure I Funds and $4,600,000 from the City of Fontana. Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Buses and Bus Facilities Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Foothill Transit Address of Requesting Entity: 100 S. Vincent Street, Suite 200, West Covina, CA 91790 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $1,187,500 to replace diesel buses with cleaner burning compressed natural gas (CNG) buses, and continue Foothill Transit's efforts to convert its entire 314-bus fleet to CNG. 100% of the funds will be used for CNG bus procurement. The total budget for this project is $20.6 million, of which approximately 25% will derive from state and local funding sources, including MOSIP (Municipal Operator Service Improvement Program) and Prop 1B (both local), and STA (State Transit Assistance). Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Surface Transportation Priorities, Grade Crossings on Designated High Speed Rail Corridors Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Alameda Corridor-East Construction Authority Address of Requesting Entity: 4900 Rivergrade Road, Suite A120, Irwindale, CA 91706 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $1,235,000 for the construction of a two-mile railroad trench to grade separate four rail/ highway crossings in the City of San Gabriel, CA (San Gabriel Trench Project). 100% of the funding will be used for the construction of the San Gabriel Trench. This federal funding provides the match for the approximately $388,564,000 (70% of Total Project Cost) in California State and Local funding already committed to the Project. In addition, provide an earmark of $570,000 to be used to support the construction of the San Gabriel Trench Project and other Alameda Corridor-East grade separation projects by the Alameda Corridor-East Construction Authority. 100% of the funding will be used to support the construction of the aforementioned projects. Requesting Member: Congressman David Dreier Bill Number: H.R. 1105, FY09 Omnibus Appropriations Act Account: Surface Transportation Priorities Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority Address of Requesting Entity: 406 E. Huntington Drive, Suite 202, Monrovia, CA 91016 Description of Request: Provide an earmark of $237,500 to complete an assessment of Transit Oriented Development (TOD) along Phase II of the Gold Line Foothill Extension. Approximately, $100,000 or 42% is for economic analysis; $100,000 or 42% for engineering; and $37,500 or 16% for environmental assessment. This request is consistent with the intended and authorized purpose of the Surface Transportation Priorities account. This funding will complete the TOD study. The Metro Gold Line Foothill Extension Construction Authority will provide a minimum of a 20% local cost share with local funds.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might consume to begin by expressing my great appreciation to my friend from Colorado for yielding me the customary 30 minutes. (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. DREIER. Let me begin, as I did at the outset of the debate on the unfunded mandate point of order, Madam Speaker, by saying that we are all saddened with the very tragic news that Ms. Slaughter and her constituents have faced with the tragic plane crash which has taken place just outside of Buffalo with, reportedly, 48 people killed, and our thoughts and prayers continue to be with all of them. Let me say, at the beginning of this, Madam Speaker, I asked my friend who's managing this rule to yield to me, because I find it--I will associate myself with many of the points that he made. I will associate myself with certainly his closing remarks about the ability of the United States of America to take on great challenges that we face. But, Madam Speaker, to stand here and somehow talk about the great degree of transparency, when we, at midnight, were sitting in the Rules Committee, and the questions being posed to us could not be answered; that we were posing could not be answered, number one. And number two, we had before us a bill that we were told was exactly what the gentleman had said, made available on-line so that the American people could see it, and then I arrived just a few hours later, had come in early this morning to find that the measure was not even available on- line until well after midnight because three sections of the bill were, in fact, missing. And so, my point is that we all know how much pain there is right now across this country. When you look at the people who have lost their jobs, if you look at people who are losing their homes, if you look at the tragic loss of life that is taking place, I talked to a good friend of mine yesterday who told me that his son's best friend's father had just committed suicide because of the economic downturn that we are facing. Madam Speaker, we know how personal this is. We know how terrible the situation that we face is. And that's why I believe that the commitment that has been made overwhelmingly, across the board, by Democrats and Republicans alike, that we would spend time deliberating over this issue to ensure that we get it right, that we would work in a bipartisan way, as President Obama repeatedly has promised, from his inaugural address right here on the west front of the Capitol to speech after speech that he's delivered, and through many of his actions. Now, last night, as we sat approaching midnight in the Rules Committee, my very good friend, the distinguished chair of the Committee on Appropriations was before us, talking about the fact that every single day, since the election, save two, he and members of his staff have been working to try and put this bill together. He referred to the fact that members of his staff, for the second time in a week or two, have gone 2 days without any sleep, working to put this bill together. We all understand, Madam Speaker, the urgency that is there. No one wants to delay action. No one wants to delay action on this very important bill because of the fact that the American people are hurting. But we do know this: What we've been able to see in this measure, in fact, goes way beyond the goal that is stated, that being stimulating our economy. We understand that important infrastructure spending cannot only play an important role in creating jobs, but it also can deal with the very important issue of goods movement, ensuring that our constituents are able to move around. We know that the grid and broadband infrastructure development is critical if we are going to remain competitive in this global marketplace. And yet, that is a very small fraction of this nearly $1 trillion measure, Madam Speaker. Now, as we listened to the testimony that was delivered in the Rules Committee, an exchange took place between the distinguished chair of the Committee on Appropriations and our new Rules Committee colleague, the gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx). And in that exchange, the question that was asked by Ms. Foxx was, how many jobs are going to be created by this measure? And I congratulate the distinguished chair of the Committee on Appropriations for pointing to the fact that he has no idea how many jobs are going to be created. And he correctly said that we can all find our own economists who support the notion of a certain number of jobs being created. Now, I will say that the chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, Christina Romer, under President Obama, has, based on her study, found that the alternative proposal that we Republicans offered would create nearly twice as many jobs in half the amount of time than this package that is before us. So using one of his economists, Madam Speaker, I will say it buttresses our argument to ensure that we put into place our package for commission growth, as opposed to a massive spending bill. So the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations said he has no idea how many jobs are going to be created. And what is it that we have before us? We have before us a package that is indicative of what I describe as the ideological baggage of the past. It is nothing but throwing money at the problem, without the kind of oversight that is necessary, without the kind of scrutiny that is necessary. And as my friend from Texas, Judge Poe, said earlier, one of his constituents wants to opt out of this plan because the estimates are that it will cost $10,000 per family. Well, unfortunately, that's not an option that we have before us right now, because this is the measure that people are going to be voting on and I suspect will pass. I believe that it's a mistake. I believe it's a mistake, and I will tell you who else I believe if he were alive would conclude that it's a mistake. And we've used this quote repeatedly. It first came to my attention by our friend from St. Louis, Todd Akin, who told me that his 88-year-old father who obviously lived during the time of the Great Depression found this quote. Henry Morgenthau was the Treasury Secretary under Franklin Delano Roosevelt, and he testified before the House Ways and Means Committee in 1939. And in that testimony, Madam Speaker, the Secretary of the Treasury, under Franklin Roosevelt, obviously, not some right-wing conservative economist, the Treasury Secretary under Franklin Roosevelt said: ``We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent, and it does not work. I say, after 8 years of this Roosevelt administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started, and an enormous debt to boot.'' Now, that was in 1939, Madam Speaker. We are making a mistake if we proceed with this measure. I believe that. The American economy is going to get stronger because, as I said earlier, we are the most productive, we are the most innovative people on the face of the earth. We're going to get stronger. My fear is that this measure will, in fact, slow the economic recovery that we all would like to see take place soon. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Two-and-a-half hours, and you went through a thousand pages.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield a minute to my good friend from Tyler, Texas (Mr. Gohmert).

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I would like to yield at this point 30 seconds to our good friend from Texas, distinguished secretary of the Republican Conference, Mr. Carter.

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

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself 15 seconds to simply say to my friend, who unfortunately wouldn't yield, we do have a thousand pages here. This was put online after midnight. We all voted in favor of 48 hours--you voted in favor of 48 hours--to allow the American people and our colleagues to see this. We all understand the urgency of this matter. Has my colleague read this? Many of us have been trying to go through it since after midnight in the Rules Committee.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, at this time I am happy to yield----

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, at this time, I'm happy to yield 1 minute to our good friend from Roswell, Georgia (Mr. Price).

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, at this time, I'm happy to yield 1 minute to our friend from Mesa, Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, at this time, I'm happy to yield 1 minute to a former Rules Committee member, the gentleman from Marietta, Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. DREIER. At this time, Madam Speaker, I'd like to yield 2 minutes to our very dynamic new member of the Rules Committee, the gentlewoman from Grandfather Community, North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).

Mr. DREIER. Will the gentleman yield? I would yield my friend 30 seconds. Has his time expired, Madam Speaker?

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I began by reporting to the House of the sad news that I received yesterday when a man telephoned me to say that his young son's best friend's father had just committed suicide because of the economic difficulty their family was facing. We all know how serious this situation is. We have friends who have lost homes, people who have lost jobs, and we all know that it is imperative that we take action and that we take action now, and most important, Madam Speaker, that we do the right thing. Now I'm going to urge my colleagues to oppose the previous question on this measure. Why? So that we can do what every single Member of this institution on a unanimous recorded vote said they wanted to do on Tuesday, and, that is, say that 48 hours should be provided for Members to look at this bill. The Rules Committee got this package very late last night, around midnight. We were told at that time just before midnight that it was online, available for the American people to see, and, Madam Speaker, it was not. Three sections were missing. Not until well after midnight was this made available. And so any Member who cast a vote in favor of allowing 48 hours for this measure to be considered should vote no on the previous question so that we will provide an amendment to allow for what everyone said they wanted to in fact take place. This measure is, as has been reported, a thousand pages, and no one knows what it's going to do, including our friend the chairman of the Appropriations Committee who in his testimony last night before the Rules Committee said he had no idea how many jobs would be created. He had no idea how many jobs would be created, but we have to take action. And, Madam Speaker, we can take action by putting into place a growth- oriented tax package which will in fact get our economy back on track. I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, may I inquire how much time is remaining on the debate on the point of order.

Mr. DREIER. At this time I would like to yield 1 minute to my good friend from Texas (Mr. Poe).

Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time to say this saddens me greatly. President Obama has come forward and talked about the issue of transparency, disclosure and accountability, and he has talked about hope, and he has talked about change. And we've all been very inspired by the words of President Obama. And we've been inspired by many of his actions and his effort to reach out and work with us in a bipartisan way to deal with the challenge of getting our economy back on track. It is something that I believe is terrific. It's wonderful. And it's what is needed at this time. But I will say, Madam Speaker, that as we look at what has been put before us, a 1,000-page bill, and we are told by so many that if we don't vote for this bill, we're choosing to do nothing, in fact, I will say that I did not like it when the President said that there are some out there who want to do nothing. And Madam Speaker, I will say that I know of no Republican, no Democrat, I know of no one in this country who wants to do nothing. Because just the other night when I had a telephone town hall meeting and listened to a number of people, including a small contractor, a small businessman who is a building contractor, having trouble getting access to credit so that he can get to work, I was struck with the fact that he told me, looking at a $1- trillion measure is not only not going to help him, but in fact, it will exacerbate, it will worsen the challenges that he has. We talked about our alternative. In fact, in this town hall meeting, Madam Speaker, one of my constituents asked me at the outset to support President Obama and his package. And when I began explaining the difficulty with this package and the alternative that we have that is focused on small businesses, entrepreneurs, the self-employed and families across this country, focusing on marginal rate reduction, focusing on encouraging responsibility so that people can gain equity in their homes by incentivizing them to make a greater down payment on that home and to take up the inventory that exists there, as I walked through these provisions, this person who began saying to me that it was imperative that I support this package then said, your alternative makes much more sense. And so, Madam Speaker, I want to disabuse any of my colleagues of this notion that we want to do nothing. We very much want to work diligently to ensure that we can get our economy back on track. And we have a pro-growth package which is modeled after what John F. Kennedy did in 1961 and what Ronald Reagan did in 1981. And with that, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. DREIER. Reclaiming my time, that is exactly what I wanted to say. As we begin this debate, our thoughts and prayers go to all of the victims and the families and Mrs. Slaughter whom I know is dealing with that issue, Madam Speaker. Let me say, as we now focus on this very, very important debate, we had a unanimous vote here in the House, a unanimous vote, that called for 48 hours to be provided for Members of Congress and the American people to see this measure before we would have a chance to vote on it. We all know, as Speaker Pelosi said yesterday, that this is both transformational and historic. And for that reason, I believe that if we have a measure before us that is historic and transformational, we should comply with the vote that was cast by every single Member who was present at the time saying that 48 hours should be provided. And unfortunately, there was virtually no time provided. We had a copy of the bill placed before us in the Rules Committee very late last night. And it is my understanding that the online measure at that point, which was touted by Members who were in the Rules Committee, actually omitted three sections of the bill and that it was not placed online as we're going to be voting on it today until after midnight; after midnight. So that means earlier this morning is when it was placed online. Now, Madam Speaker, I have a statement here from our good friend, the distinguished majority leader, Mr. Hoyer, who said, ``The House is scheduled to meet at 9 a.m. tomorrow and is expected to proceed directly to consideration of the American Recovery and Reinvestment conference report. The conference report text will be filed this evening, giving Members enough time to review the conference report before voting on it tomorrow afternoon.'' Madam Speaker, the American people are hurting. We are going through one of the most difficult economic challenges that we've faced in modern history. There is no doubt about it. In fact, if one looks at the economic downturn, we suffered in 1991 and 2001 very, very shallow economic recessions. The early 1980s was the last time we faced a challenge as difficult as the one we are in the midst of today. We have put forward a very pro-growth economic package that I know that the American people would be able to support. And I'm convinced, based on the empirical evidence that we have of what took place in 1961 and 1981, it would unleash the potential of the American people, because we are the most productive worker on the face of the Earth. We are the people who are the most innovative in the world. And for us to, in any way, constrain that growth potential is, I believe, wrong. And what we have before us is a 1,000-page bill. This is 1,000 pages, Madam Speaker. And I'm reminded when Ronald Reagan was delivering a State of the Union message when he held up a document that was just about like this, and he dropped it right there on the lectern. And he said that he would never sign anything like that again. And here we are on Friday the 13th of 2009, we are in the midst of considering a measure following a campaign that promised transparency, disclosure, accountability and hope. And as we listened to the debate last night in the Rules Committee, which went on for quite a while, I have to say that there is a lot of hope involved in this 1,000-page bill. But there are things about it that we know. It is approaching $1 trillion when you take interest in consideration. I know it is $790 billion, but when you take into consideration the interest that will be shouldered, it is a $1 trillion package. We know that. The hope is that people are saying it is this or nothing else, Madam Speaker, this or nothing else. And I have got to tell you that that is not the case. That is not the case. We, as Republicans, have come forward with a package from our economic stimulus working group which I believe would prevent us from having to deal with anything like this whatsoever. And the point of order that I'm raising, Madam Speaker, has to do with the fact that we don't know what is in here. I don't think that anyone knows whether or not there are unfunded mandates in here that have been imposed on the private sector, on the American people, or on local governments. And so with that, I would like to, at this juncture, reserve the balance of my time, Madam Speaker.

Mr. DREIER

Mr. DREIER. Following up on the very thoughtful remarks of my friend, Mr. McCotter, I'd like to say that we all have instance after instance of individuals who have been suffering greatly. I, this morning, as we opened this debate, talked about a great tragedy, that being the fact that a man called my office saying that his young son's best friend had just informed him that his father had committed suicide. That's clearly the most painful story you can hear of the impact of what we're feeling now with this economic downturn. It has been absolutely devastating. Friends who've lost their homes, lost their jobs, lost their savings; we are dealing with what obviously is a very, very difficult time. That's the reason that there is such passion on this debate. Now, I quoted earlier during the debate the words of Henry Morgenthau who was the Secretary of the Treasury under Franklin Delano Roosevelt who, in 1939 after going years through the New Deal, said the following before the House Ways and Means Committee in testimony. He said, ``We have tried spending money. We're spending more than we have ever spent, and it does not work. I say after 8 years of this Roosevelt administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started, and an enormous debt to boot.'' Now, Mr. Speaker, that is the reason that we feel that we can't just say ``no.'' We know that that is not the panacea that many people believe that it is, and instead we need to focus on what works. And instance after instance, Mr. Speaker, has shown what does work. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy--and this underscores this great quest for bipartisanship--delivered a speech to the Economic Club of New York--actually it was a year later in 1962. And in that speech, he said ``to increase demand and lift the economy, the federal government's most useful role is not to rush into a program of excessive increases in public expenditures, but to expand the incentives and opportunities for private expenditures.'' Now, those are the words, Mr. Speaker, of Democratic President John F. Kennedy in the early 1960s. He had just brought about broad, across- the-board, marginal rate reduction. Let me tell you what that brought about, too. It brought about an increase in the flow of revenues to the Federal Treasury. In fact, the top income tax rate was cut from the 90 percent to 70 percent, and revenues to the Federal Government increased by 62 percent. It actually grew revenues to the Treasury by reducing those rates. Also at that same period of time, tax collections from the top bracket, those in the top bracket, grew by 57 percent, meaning those who had marginal rate reduction at the top end actually paid more in taxes because of the economic growth and that was juxtaposed to tax collections all the way across the board from the Kennedy tax cuts which only grew revenues by only 11 percent. And then, Mr. Speaker, I was very privileged to come here following the 1980 election, and we had the last serious economic downturn that we faced as a Nation, nearly three decades ago, and Ronald Reagan pursued the same policies that were pursued by John F. Kennedy. He brought about sweeping marginal rate reduction; and Mr. Speaker, that grew the flow of revenues to the flow of Treasury nearly doubling that flow of revenues. And the share of tax payments by the top ten percent--again, the top 10 percent of wage earners in this country grew from had 48 percent to more than 57 percent. That means those in the top ten percent of income levels actually had an increase of nearly 10 percentage points, nearly 10 percentage points in the flow of revenues that came in from the Federal Treasury--or actually they were paying more in taxes, from 48 percent to 57 percent while the share that was borne by the top 1 percent--the very rich--grew even more dramatically, 17 percent to nearly 28 percent, thus, the flow of tax payments that came from those people who were the very richest in this country. That's why, Mr. Speaker, we are arguing that the economic stimulus working group that was put together by Leader Boehner and shared by our distinguished whip Mr. Cantor used these models of proven examples, not the failed policies that were pointed to by Secretary Morgenthau in 1939, but the success following the 1961 cut and the 1981 cut. That's why we're not simply saying ``no,'' Mr. Speaker. We are saying, let's put a positive economic growth package together. We're going to continue to fight on behalf of that.