Geoff Davis

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I rise this evening to honor John Bach, a pillar of our law enforcement community, and a recent retiree from the Kenton County Sheriff's Department. Mr. Bach's career is one that embodies dedication and service to this country. From 1966 to 1970, he served with the 777th Tactical Air Squadron based out of Pope Air Force Base, North Carolina, and was also part of the 556th Reconnaissance Squadron in southeast Asia. After completing his military service, John pursued a degree in business that he completed at Northern Kentucky University. John was quick to answer the call to service in our community. Throughout his career in law enforcement, he protected our communities in the line of duty at the Elsmere Police Department, the Boone County Police Department, the Independence Police Department and the Kenton County Sheriff's Department. I would like to thank John for his brave service to our Nation and for helping to make the communities of northern Kentucky safer for all of our residents as part of local law enforcement. Madam Speaker, I would like to wish John and his wife, Linda, all the best as they enter this new chapter of their lives.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the achievements of Jack Borman. In a few days, Jack will be retiring from the Kenton County Sheriff's Department, and I think this is the ideal time to honor his dedication and lifetime of service to our Nation. As a young man from Silver Grove, Kentucky, Jack joined the military and was deployed to fight in the Korean War. He bravely fought in missions at Triangle Hill, in Operation Smack and in the now infamous battle at Pork Chop Hill. For his bravery and valor at the Battle of Pork Chop Hill, one of the most deadly battles of the Korean War, he was awarded the Silver Star and a Purple Heart. Several years ago, MGM Studios released a film about this battle, and Jack added movie star to his long list of lifetime accomplishments. From fighting in Korea to serving Kenton County, he has selflessly served and protected us. Jack, we thank you for your service and wish you much success in your retirement. Jack is a busy grandfather to 19 grandchildren. I'm sure his life will continue to be a great adventure. For all that, thank you for your service.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, on Monday, May 21, 2007, I was absent from the House for medical reasons. Had I been present I would have voted: On rollcall No. 384-``yea''; on rollcall No. 385-``yea.''

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, because the amendment to equalize benefits for wounded Guardsmen and Reservists with the regular Army was rejected by the Rules Committee yesterday, I offer a privileged motion.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, I object. The minority has not cleared this.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, last month more than 1,200 students from across the country visited Washington to participate in the national finals of We the People: The Citizen and the Constitution. This program is the most extensive educational program in the country, developed to educate young people about the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. It is with great pride that I recognize a class from my own Highlands High School of Fort Thomas, Kentucky, in the Fourth District for their accomplishment in this competition. These outstanding students, using knowledge of the U.S. Constitution, won their statewide competition and earned the chance to come to our Nation's capital and compete at the national level. At the national level, these dedicated students won the Unit One: Foundations of Democracy Award. I would like to take a moment to recognize the names of these outstanding young people from Highlands High School: Alex Adams, Evan Bush, Kara Dyer, Jessica Earlywine, Jessica Federle, Maria Gurren, John Holloway, Alan Hutchinson, Marjorie Kimball, Connie Kremer, Sam Laskey, Heather Moyer, Emily Nordling, Anna Remley, Lauren Runk, Andrea Spencer, and Corwyn Wyatt. I also wish to commend the teacher of the class, Julie Kuhnhein, who is responsible for preparing these young constitutional experts for the national finals. Also worthy of special recognition are Rachel Bingham and Robin Winkfield, the State coordinators, and Glenn Manns, the district coordinator, who are among those responsible for implementing the We the People program in my State. I congratulate these students on their exceptional achievement at the We the People national finals. One thing we can all remember is that there is no substitute for participating in the governmental process, no substitute for the investment of our lives and our time. I commend all of you for your hard work and for the long hours of preparation, and commend you for a victory well earned, well deserved and bringing honor and credit to the Fourth District of Kentucky.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Six

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania. I just want to say I appreciate the leadership you have shown since the beginning of this Congress on being the lead sponsor of the Countdown Crew. Both Bill Shuster from Pennsylvania and I were small business owners. We have lived out in the real world. We are not attorneys. We come from an environment of working and manufacturing and distribution and logistics with real people. We know the burdens on making sure our employees are covered with health insurance. We know the impact of tax increases and tax cuts. For those of you joining us right now, we would love to hear your stories, the impact on being able to keep more of your own money, what it has meant to you and the ability to invest in your children's future, to build a future for yourself, to build a nest egg, to start a small business, to expand the small business that you have. Bill and I have heard literally hundreds of stories since the first of the year. We would like to hear yours. You can communicate with us directly at Countdowncrew@mail.house.gov. That is Countdowncrew@mail.house.gov. At the end of the day, I believe that the key principle that we have shared over and over and over again is that our focus and the focus of the government is that the government cannot create value or wealth for people. What the government can do, done rightly, is create a playing field and a framework to unleash the creativity in the American people, to give them the opportunity to pursue their dreams, to pursue a future, to build a future for themselves, and ultimately we start that process by making sure that people can keep more of what they earn. When you have control over your money, you are going to invest it in such a way that it makes a difference for you, your family, ultimately for your community and the country. That is why we say we want to create taxpayers, not raise taxes. It has been a few weeks since we were able to get together here on the floor as we have been counting the days since our first session the second week of January when we began sharing what was ahead. We predicted at that time that there would be tax increases coming. Much of the change in the election was not driven by fiscal policy. It was driven by anger or resentment or emotion related to the national security situation. But as people are waking up, I am traveling in different parts of my district, many folks upset about that said, ``I didn't realize I was voting for a tax increase.'' In fact, what was voted on in the House last month with was the largest tax increase in American history. My friends, that is not a solution to the country's challenges. By raising taxes, we limit opportunity. By raising taxes, money comes out of our communities, it comes out of working families' pockets, it comes to bureaucrats in Washington. When some of my colleagues on the other side made comments about wanting to reduce the deficit and spending, they didn't want to reduce spending. What in fact they wanted to do was reduce defense spending, but not reduce spending on other programs. Indeed, that spending has increased under this budget. What we are looking at over 5 years is an estimated $900 billion tax increase. That is going to be devastating to the economy. In Kentucky alone, I come from a district that is very diverse with agriculture, manufacturing, distribution, logistics. We have river industries. We have the largest inland port in North America with the Port of Ashland-Huntington, where much of our Nation's energy supply transits. Our average working family in Kentucky is going to see a tax increase of $2,563, right off the bottom line. When I think what we could do with that, I have got my second child going into college now, I think of what we could do with $2,500 is immense. We look at the counterpoint, I look to the gentleman's point earlier regarding what happened when taxes were cut by President Kennedy, what happened when taxes were cut by President Reagan, what happened when taxes were cut by President Bush and the Republican Congress at that time, at a very difficult period in this Nation's history as we entered into war, just prior to the 9/11 attacks. There was a recession in 2001 that was inherited from the prior administration. What we have seen is record revenues to the Federal Government by reducing taxes. By raising the ceiling, in fact pushing the burden upward on taxes and reducing the burden on working class families, taking millions of people off the tax rolls, by creating a 10 percent tax bracket, has resulted in the creation of 7.5 million jobs, record revenues to the Federal Government, and that done in a time of war. What that tells me is that these principles work; that Republican, conservative fiscal principles work by allowing people to keep more of their own money. My question in fact to folks is if you had to write that $2,500 check, what do you want to get in return for that? At the end of the day, we want to get something that is going to make a difference for our family, our community and our country, and not fuel empty rhetoric, particularly spending on programs that aren't necessarily going to add any value. 180,000 jobs were created in March alone. As we travel throughout our districts, I hear stories in a wide variety of industries, many of them I have shared here on various evenings as we have come back to Washington, D.C., the successes that people have had by being allowed to keep more of their own money and build a future in their hometown, in the heartland, and not send it to bureaucrats far away. I would like to invite my colleagues from Texas, Congressman Conaway and Mr. Shuster, to continue the dialogue with some of these examples. But if you just joined us again, we are the Countdowncrew@mail.house.gov. We would like to hear your stories. We would like to hear your testimonials, how it has made a difference for you in creating jobs and small businesses in our local communities where 88 percent of all new jobs created in this country come from. It is not going to come from giant corporations. It is certainly not going to be created from liberal policies of the folks on the other side of the aisle. It comes by you producing your future, chasing your vision and investing your dollars to build that. With that, I yield back to the gentleman.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. You might want to share about the idea of PAYGO which means something to us as Americans and means something very different in this Congress. It is not how you balance your checkbook at home.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. I go back to Yogi Berra's old saying about deja vu all over again. You talk about what the right tax rate is and how do we explain it to the American people. I think it would be helpful if the Democrats would simply tell the truth. The reason I lay this out, as a former small business owner, I remember in 1992 being told stories by then-candidate Bill Clinton how he was not going to raise taxes. President Bush at the time made the statement that Clinton ran saying he wouldn't raise taxes, and then turned around and made a deal that raised taxes, damaged his credibility and hurt the economy at the time. I was getting ready to step out into the entrepreneurial world and leave the software industry to start my own business. I had manufacturing clients that wanted me and eventually some of the folks that I hired to work with me and assist them in improving their competitiveness nationally. We started that business in late spring of 1992, getting it up off the ground. We managed to feed our families that first 6 months and do all right in that time, but our real opportunity was going to come in 1993. All of a sudden after Mr. Clinton became President, he came before the American people and he didn't say I am going to keep my promise and cut those taxes because we know that allowing people to keep more of their own money creates a future for them. He offered me a new alternative as a new small business owner with employees, with health plans to pay for, with taxes to pay for, with regulatory fees to pay for, dealing with workmen's compensation and disability and costs that I had never known in the large corporate world, and he invited me to invest in the United States Government. I looked at this as a small business owner and a former military officer. I thought my investment in the United States Government should be first in providing for the national defense, how was I going to promote the general welfare as the Constitution would ask us to do, I would hope in infrastructure, in projects that were going to be seed money to create more jobs and to stimulate the economy in our area. But what did we get, the largest tax increase in American history at that time, actually a fraction of the one that was passed in this recent liberal Democratic budget. We reduced the size of our military and we weakened national defense by taking several divisions out of the standing Army, reducing the size of the Marine Corps, reducing the size of the Navy, reducing the airlift capability in the Air Force. We increased spending in social programs. We increased the mandatory spending rate in social programs to nearly twice the rate of inflation while shorting our men and women in uniform in the mid-1990s as an administration priority. Then radical Islamic extremism intruded itself upon the United States on 9/11. We had been dealing with it before then, but like the old saying of the Purlator man commercial, ``you pay me now or you pay me later.'' Now we are in a big catch-up situation from a national security standpoint of things that could have been handled 10 years ago. I think back as a small business owner, what were the costs that were taken away when I invested in the government? Well, the additional tax money, we saw no benefit of that. I saw my clients hurt. I saw manufacturing companies hurt, and I saw other machine tool companies hurt by increased environmental compliance and the increased cost of regulation. And the attempts to manage health care from a national perspective actually drove costs up. In Kentucky, by doing a plan that was called Hillary-lite, something that was a lesser plan of the Democrat health care proposals of that same year of 1993, we drove 45 of 47 insurance carriers out of the State, quadrupled the cost of health care for small business owners in a relatively short period of time. To me that was the opposite of the original intent. If I invest in something, I would like to see a return. If we spend money in our community, we would like to see a benefit accrue for our community and it certainly didn't happen there. Just on the taxes that we paid, and we don't know where they went to support all of these programs with this increased investment, we could have hired probably three more consultants or nearly a third larger workforce which would have created more taxpayers and which would have been helping more businesses to compete and would have been putting more dollars into the Federal treasury. But on the other hand, now we found ourselves at the end of the Clinton administration needing to come out of a recession. We have reduced taxes and we have moved to simplify regulation. But because of the actions last November, I believe that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle sincerely but incorrectly have interpreted that election as another opportunity to affirm their desire to have small business owners invest. And the truth of the matter is that if 88 percent of our jobs are created by small businesses owners, the last thing we want to do is tax those who are going to be starting those companies and starting those family enterprises. Again, in 1,335 days from now the average family in my State will have a $2,563 tax increase. You mentioned the 50 percent increase that is coming for those in the 10 percent tax bracket. That benefited 1.2 million people in my State, but let's look at senior citizens. My mom lives on a fixed income right now. She draws Social Security and her retirement. Fortunately, she has a supplemental Medicare insurance plan to help offset some of the additional cost. But if you take an elderly couple with a $40,000 income, their tax bill is going to rise 156 percent in 2011 from $583 to $1,489. So we have helped them reduce the average cost of their prescription medication by $1,200, but we will increase their taxes by $1,400 by what the Democratic Congress intends to do by simply not doing anything. They are going to allow these cuts which have had so much positive impact on the communities and the country expire.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. One point of order here to point out. The ATM right now is going to be the American people for the Democrat tax program. They are going to have the largest tax increase in history.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Our tax dollars pay for somebody to actually write this, too.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. I think the one thing that gets lost in all this, too, I remember when I was young and I did a little work on the side when I was first in the aerospace industry and I thought it was so great to make a little bit of extra money basically to pay for Christmas, and when I went in to do my taxes the following spring, I found out that at the very low-income level I was at, because it was independent contractor work, that heralded the alternative minimum tax and almost made it not worthwhile to have expended the many hours that I did on the project. I think what gets lost, what Mike was reading here, I still am marvelling that our tax dollars paid to create such a behemoth, that we were investing in something like that, which gave me a headache just listening to it. Although I could see the goose bumps there. But other than being a job creation program for accountants, most of whom do not like the complexity of many of these rules because of what it does to their clients, I think we need to look at a more human side of the impact that regressive taxes have. By reducing taxes, by allowing people to keep more of their own money, it created jobs, over 7 million jobs. It has kept our money local. I think that one of the things I would like to point to for folks here who are watching the Countdown Crew, and you can contact us at countdowncrew@mail.house.gov, we want to create taxpayers, not raise taxes. By creating taxpayers, there will be more revenues that go for all of our communities. But at the local level, oftentimes the question comes up and I hear it from children a lot in the schools who go around talking with my own kids, Daddy, where do the police come from, where do the school teachers come from, where does the library come from. Ultimately, that comes from our local communities, from taxes. It is property taxes in the vast majority of our taxes that pay for our schools. My oldest daughter is about to graduate from college soon, and she is going to become a schoolteacher and getting ready to move out into the economy and very excited on the one hand, but also concerned about the tax structure that is going to be facing her and the incentives to advance her education, the burdens that are going to be placed upon her just from what she has seen in the workforce. The quality of our schools is largely funded by local jobs in our communities that pay those property taxes, people who can buy homes, and if you do not have a job, it becomes very difficult to make that investment in a home. If we do not have small business owners creating jobs, we are not going to have those local taxes to be able to make the investments that are necessary in public safety, in public works, that keeps the water running in our house, that keeps the electricity moving, that keeps our roads paved and being able to expand and ultimately to be able to invest in quality of life in our communities. This is one of the reasons we have this 1,335-day countdown to the largest tax increase in history, that the American people need to know that when they can keep more of their own money, there are results. I don't want to see the average Kentucky family have an unnecessary tax increase of $2,563. We will find the benefit, not in complex tax documents like that, but simply by allowing people to keep their money to invest in the future to follow their vision and ultimately to build that nest egg for their children.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. I think it was 6.4 billion hours were taken this year.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor a distinguished businessman, philanthropist, decorated military officer, fellow West Point graduate and a pillar of our community in northern Kentucky and Cincinnati. Next month Mr. George Schaefer will retire from his position at Fifth Third Bank. Beginning as a management trainee in 1971 after completing his service in the Army, George rose through the ranks at Fifth Third and helped the company to grow into one of the largest financial institutions and bank holding companies in the United States. As George's career grew, so too did his commitment to making the entire Cincinnati metropolitan region a better place to live, work and go to school. He has raised millions of dollars for the United Way and the Cincinnati Fine Arts Fund. For 12 years, he sat on the board of trustees of the University of Cincinnati where he helped the University grow into one of the Nation's premier educational institutions. George, while your talents and leadership will surely be missed at Fifth Third, I know that your inspired work in the community will continue. I wish to thank you and your wife Betty Ann for all of your service and wish you the best as you embark on this new chapter in your life. Thank you for your service to our Nation in uniform, for answering the Nation's call. Thank you for your contributions to our community. Thank you for pouring yourself into so many aspects to improve the quality of lives for our communities in northern Kentucky and the greater Cincinnati area and every city where Fifth Third is involved. We are grateful for that commitment, for the example of service and your upholding the values that we both share of duty, honor and country.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, it's the most solemn duty that I have to honor those who have served our Nation, those who have answered the call of this generation, as us in prior generations have, to answer to that call to be ready to serve and to deploy. I rise today to honor a great American, Navy Chief Petty Officer Greg Billiter. Greg was a native of Villa Hills, Kentucky, a graduate of Covington Latin, and a true fan of his hometown teams, the Cincinnati Bengals and the Cincinnati Reds. Greg was tragically killed in action in Northern Iraq during combat operations. He leaves behind his young son, Cooper, a caring wife, loving family and a legacy that will be honored for generations to come. For Cooper, as you grow into a man, know that your dad loved you. He was a great American. He cared about you and he answered the call of this Nation. I had the opportunity to visit with his family, and they all conveyed similar sentiments of a brave, dedicated and heroic sailor. When I asked his wife, April, about Greg she told me that he truly loved what he was doing. April said, ``He was extremely patriotic, and felt that it was important for him to be part of the war and to help the other soldiers who were serving there.'' His bravery and ultimate sacrifice remind us that they were all part of a larger mission. His parents told a local newspaper that he really felt he was helping to make Iraq a safer place, especially for the children. As an explosive ordnance demolition specialist, he made a tremendous difference in the lives of many, many civilians, military personnel, and especially those children. We wonder today how many will grow up in the future and have a future because of Greg's call and his willingness to answer that call and to go and serve. Indeed, his mother said that he loved what he was doing. He felt what he was doing was right, and he knew that he made a difference. I stand here today to honor his heroic work in Iraq and in the United States Navy, and to thank him and his family for making that ultimate sacrifice. We've lost a great American in Greg, but his work will live on. Thank you, Greg. Thank you April, Cooper, Pat, and Barry, for sharing your husband, father, and son with our Nation. We are forever indebted to him. As Jesus spoke in John 15:13, no greater love has a man than this, that he lay down his lives for his friends. Indeed, Greg literally did that every day in his work to protect other service members, to protect civilians, to make a difference. Greg's reputation as a chief was quite clear. Many of his fellow shipmates came into the funeral and showed a strength of solidarity that was impressive and moving to this old soldier. I have spent many years in uniform and been with thousands and thousands of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines, and one thing spoke out clearly to me was that Greg epitomized the warrior ethos of the civilian who went into the military, who answered the call of the Nation, who grew in character, and was an exemplar in all that he did, representing the will of the founders of this Nation. Indeed, it was clear to me, from his sailors, from his family, that he was a leader, that he was a mentor, that he was a friend, that he was a proud son, that he was a loving husband and father. He was the epitome of all that we call dear and great and honorable in this land.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Madam Speaker, some of the Democratic leadership have declared it the job of Congress to micromanage the war in Iraq. Yet we learn today that the Speaker of the House has refused to be seen face-to-face with the very military commanders whose hands will be tied by the Democrat war funding bill. This latest insult to our troops should come as no surprise as others in the Democratic leadership have declared the war lost despite our military commanders' statements to the contrary, and before General Petraeus has gotten the reinforcements he has requested. His reinforcement hasn't even been fully implemented before Congressional leaders have called it a failure. I urge my colleagues to insist on a funding bill that does not give our enemies a date for our surrender. I believe our soldiers when they say the war is not lost, and we must give our military the resources it needs to win. Language of surrender is inappropriate with troops in the field and reinforces the perceptions of our enemies.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. One of the most solemn duties that we can have in the House of Representatives is to recognize the sacrifice, devotion and service of those who protect this Nation. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor the memory of Army Specialist Joey Cantrell, a soldier from Westwood, Kentucky, who recently lost his life fighting in Taji, Iraq, serving with the Army's Second Battalion, Eighth Cavalry Regiment. Specialist Cantrell graduated from Fairview High School in 2002 and was a celebrated athlete both on the football field and around the track. His football coach and mentor, Fairview school superintendent Bill Musick, told a local paper, ``You always noticed Joey Cantrell because of how he presented himself. He was a sharp kid.'' Joey overcame adversity, achieved academic excellence, was a leader and a tough competitor in athletics, and won the friendship of many. When it came to serving, his coach shared with me that Joey felt it was a call to go into the military. Recently, I had the opportunity to visit with his mother Sondra Adkins. His family and friends remembered his warm smile, thoughtful nature and his ability to excel at everything he did. Joey Cantrell will be deeply missed by all who knew him. His mother shared that Joey believed in what he was doing and gave his life doing what he wanted to do. Today, as we honor Joey's memory, our Nation grieves with his mother and his family. We are deeply indebted to Joey and thankful for his service. Soldiers like Joey Cantrell make me proud to be an American.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Would the gentleman yield for one second?

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. I just want to share, those who are joining us tonight have joined the Countdown Crew. We meet the first night of votes each legislative week. We can be reached by e-mail at CountdownCrew@mail. house.gov. And the one thing that I would like to share from my perspective, we hear a lot of statements about a desire to support the troops. And I have said for the last 2\1/2\ years that, if we say we support the troops, it is important that we listen to what they have to say. As a former member of the 82nd Airborne Division and other military units with comrades serving in all the major line Army units, commanding brigades, serving on the senior staffs, receiving e-mail reports on a weekly basis, even from a platoon leader who is in Sadr City right now, we get a somewhat different perspective on the politics and debates that are going on back here in the House Chamber. And I would say this from a perspective of looking at the fiscal implications of decisions. When we talk about the supplemental spending, the vast majority of money, and the original clean bill before politics got involved was designed for one thing, it was designed for troop support, it was designed for equipment reset, it was designed to provide support for provincial reconstruction teams for the transition of Iraqi security forces to be effective in their mission on the ground. Unfortunately, due to the Hatch Act, the troops themselves don't have a voice where they can come into this Chamber and debate, and so as we have seen on numerous occasions, opinion is often substituted for fact. And it is an honest opinion; it is an honest viewpoint. I think we have honest disagreements. I think one thing that both sides can agree on is that there were strategic mistakes that were made early in the campaign due to institutional infrastructure and process issues that are endemic in the United States Government and need to be reformed. But the truth of the matter, at the moment, is we have people in harm's way that are deployed forward who actually watch C-SPAN, who watch these debates. Many of them are friends of mine that I have known for well over 30 years and we have served together, a number of us served together in the Middle East. And the perspective that I would bring is this when we talk about emergency supplemental spending, and it comes back to an aspect of fiscal responsibility, to the gentleman from Pennsylvania's point earlier: a supplemental spending bill is designed specifically to augment needs that were not covered in regularly budgeted, authorized, or appropriated lines. And to put this into context, there are many divisions in the Congress, particularly in the Democratic Caucus, regarding the war. We are all well aware of them. I have many friends on both sides of the aisle. There are honest disagreements and disputes. But the one thing, to quote my friend, Hal Rogers from Kentucky, where he said, ``Attention K-Mart shoppers,'' at the end of the appropriations hearing last week. ``A variety of spending provisions have been placed in a military supplemental bill that have nothing to do with national security in order to encourage those to vote for it.'' And I want to put this into context, that over $20 billion in nonmilitary, nonnational security spending has been included. They include $283 million in milk subsidies that are already funded in other programs. It includes $74 million for peanut storage. Now, when I went to flight school at Fort Rucker, Alabama, at the U.S. Army Aviation Center, there were two great economic engines in the area. One was the United States Army Aviation Center that trained the pilots for the U.S. Army, the rotary wing force that provides our air assault and attack helicopter capability worldwide today, and also the peanut industry. The last time I checked, the peanut industry was not directly related to American national security. Twenty-five million dollars are in payments to spinach producers on a national security supplemental bill. And this also rescinds $89 million in homeland security funding that allegedly would have lapsed in fiscal year 2006. The reason that I bring these up, and the billions of dollars in spending, is not to highlight honest disagreements about policy issues which have a rightful place in this Chamber. And my friends on the other side are certainly entitled to their views, the basis of their perception. I certainly have my views on the subject which are different from many in the administration and on my side of the aisle as well. But the one thing that I will share is let's translate these dollars into reality from a fiscal perspective. When Secretary Gates came over to testify before the Armed Services Committee in his first hearing in January of 2007, the first major request, and I was very heartened by this, was a request to increase the end strength of the United States Army by 96,000 soldiers. Now, why that number is important, I have advocated for nearly 5 years for a 100,000 soldier increase to the end strength to deal with and augment the operations tempo that our troops have experienced since the draw- downs in the mid-1990s. The rate and the pace of that transition is very significant upon our soldiers. And as a matter of fiscal responsibility for the investment that we have made in them and the commitment that we have made to them, I think it is important that we see that increase. And I was very heartened to see an acceptance of that need in the civilian appointed leadership of the Defense Department. But here is the fiscal issue. When we talk about $20 billion in nonmilitary spending that were put on that supplemental bill, here is what $1 billion means. Regardless of your views on national security, $1 billion roughly translates into 10,000 fully equipped light infantry soldiers and fully trained and accessed into the military. The reason that that number is important to keep in mind, at the end of the day, as we talk about force structure and staffing, I would ask my friends, would it have not been a more prudent use of our national security dollars and emergency supplemental, rather than going for programs or peanuts and spinach and the milk program, which I think would be more appropriately addressed jurisdictionally in the farm bill, to use that money, if there was a need, to assess it for troop training, to augment the needs for the conflicts that we are going to be facing in the 21st century, which are going to be significant. And I think that those conflicts would have come regardless of our policies there. But nonetheless, this approach, I believe, is a poor use of fiscal stewardship and begs the real question at the end of the day of what we actually have voted for from a policy change, a world view change when we changed Speakers in January. As I have shared with many when we get asked about how is this going to be paid for, every working family in America making between $30- and $50,000 will have a $2,098 tax increase if those tax cuts are not extended and made permanent by 2010. And with that I will yield back to the gentleman, but I just wanted to clarify that point from a national security perspective. Understand that it would be helpful for, I think, the American people to understand there are many nongermane issues and spending lines that have been added on this bill that have nothing to do with our current national security situation.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. I think, to the gentleman's point, I received some correspondence from a colonel who came back from Iraq recently, and he shared this perspective. He shared that he had worked for General Abizaid, and he just made the comment, General Abizaid, the Central Command Commander, made the comment that dealing with Islamic radicalism is something that you want to do as an away game. And unlike different times in our history that, again, regardless of perceptions of the decisions that were made before you and I came here to be engaged in this conflict, there are second- and third-order effects that will be inherited by a precipitous withdrawal. And when I go back, I listen to so many different voices with so many different perspectives, but the one unity of purpose that they say is that there would be profound consequences. In fact, one of the ones most recently was a friend who was in Task Force Ranger in Mogadishu, which I believe President Clinton reinforced an operation in 1993 to capture a tribal leader, a warlord, Mohammed Farah Aideed. This friend and Task Force Ranger shared that at the end of the Blackhawk Down incident, where America, frankly, lost the information war despite completely removing this militia, he shared with me over coffee recently and said, you know, little did we know that there were al Qaeda technical advisers who had served in Afghanistan fighting the mujahedin and were sent by Osama bin Laden to assist these groups because they were dealing with Americans and the consequences of leaving, when, in fact, he said if we had simply been able to stay, it would have sent a very different message. We could have accomplished the mission of apprehending the foe. And to your point, again, the troops, I think, oftentimes inadvertently are used as human shields in debate, but we don't get down to the issues of what they really see on the ground and the perspective that they bring to this discussion.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. I think your point on that too, if I might interject, the Members of the other party, for whom I have great personal respect though I disagree in execution of the policy, are those that have been very staunch and very consistent in their opposition to the use of our troops in offensive operations overseas. And the reason that I bring that up is that some of the statements that have been made, and I am not referring to provocative statements, simply positions that were taken, had been controversial in their own caucus as well as in the Congress in general. But the reason that I bring it up is that those convictions, I think, echo at one point where we have mutual agreement, and on a variety of issues. And the point I called for during the debate a few weeks ago on the resolution regarding whether one accepted the ability of the Commander in Chief to authorize the combatant commander to reinforce troops on the ground was this: that if we are going to have a real vote that affects real people in the field, then we need to use the power of the purse of the United States Congress to vote to cut or sequester funding related to that. And I think that is a noble cause regardless of which side one is on in that from the standpoint of the Republic. I know where I am. I am with my former comrades who are in a country right now to make sure they have the resources they need. But one of my friends, one of our colleagues, made a comment last Thursday night that there was a bit of a fishing expedition going on for votes, and the irony wasn't lost on me when I actually saw the list of appropriations he was talking about: $120 million for the shrimp and Manhattan fishing industries, that would equip over 1,000 of our light infantry soldiers with what they need to do their job; $5 million for those engaged in the breeding, rearing, or transporting of live fish, think what $5 million can do from an operational standpoint. We start going through this in detail, and we see $16 million for additional office space for the House of Representatives.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to honor the legacy of a brave young man who lost his life serving in Iraq. Sergeant Phillip McNeill, who grew up in Owingsville, Kentucky, was killed in Iraq on January 20, 2007. Sergeant McNeill was serving with the 3rd Battalion, 509th Parachute Infantry Regiment, based in Fort Richardson, Alaska, when his Humvee was struck by an IED, bringing his bright young life to a tragic end. Sergeant McNeill came from a family steeped in American military tradition. His military service was inspired by the brave men in his family who had served before him. His family described his dedication to his mission, saying that he ``believed in the cause and that he was a soldier who wanted to be over there.'' This was Sergeant McNeill's second tour in Iraq. As we celebrate the spirit of this great soldier, my thoughts and prayers are with Sergeant Phillip McNeill's family and friends. We are humbled by Sergeant McNeill's dedication, and we are forever indebted to him for making the ultimate sacrifice for our Nation and for our freedom.

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky

Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky. Thank you, Bill. I appreciate the leadership you have taken on this issue. The one thing that our group is consistent in is all of us have come from the small business world. All of us have come from that arena that creates the jobs in America, pursuing a vision, pursuing opportunity. For those who have just joined us, you have joined the Countdown Crew. You can join us at countdowncrew@mail.house.gov. We have gotten thousands of e-mails from around the United States based on the first few evenings that we have been talking about the impact of positive, progressive, pro-growth economic policies that allow working families to keep more of what they own and create incentives for small businesses. As we go into the time right now, the reason we are called the Countdown Crew is because of the fact that unless legislation is passed to extend the tax cuts that have been so bountiful and so beneficial to the American people, to the United States economy, in creating millions of jobs, those tax cuts will expire at the end of 2010 and every working family in the United States is going to receive a tax increase. And 1,398 days from now, there will be a tax increase on every working family. A family of four making between $30,000 and $50,000 a year will have a $2,092 tax increase imposed upon them. That doesn't come with additional legislation being passed. In fact, the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, the gentleman from New York, has said that he is not going to introduce any tax legislation to extend those tax cuts and they will expire. So for everybody watching tonight, your tax bill is going to go up by a minimum of $2,000. When you think about what that means, let's look at the other side, the positive side of the Republican policy, the conservative policy of allowing people to keep more of what they earn. First, by keeping more of what you earn, it is invested in causes that are important for you, whether it is put into your home, whether it is put into your family, whether it is saved for education, whether it is invested in a new car, in clothing. We can think about any wide variety of issues, but those are the dollars that fuel the economy. I believe very firmly we see it in the numbers, that when people are allowed to keep their own money in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks by extending those cuts in a time of war, that we have seen unprecedented economic growth take place in this country and a recovery that shows right now industrial productivity, our manufacturing productivity in the United States, is at an all-time record high, which is an amazing thing as the United States economy continues to churn along. In fact, the growth that has taken place in the United States economy in the last 3 years is greater than the entire economic output of China, which is the largest potential economic competitor to us in the long run. The reason that I share this is because it has made a difference in the lives of ordinary people. When folks are allowed to keep more of what they earn, they are going to make sure that those dollars are accomplishing things for their family, especially over the long term. I would like to tell one story as we begin tonight that I think typifies the success that can be seen by allowing people to keep more of their own money. As Bill said, this is not a partisan issue. John Kennedy cut taxes and had economic growth take off and record revenues come into the Treasury. We have allowed people to keep more of what they earned, and what happened this past year, record revenues have come into the United States Treasury. And the real issue is controlling spending, not taking more of people's hard-earned dollars. Well, pursuing that vision was something that Bill Shuster has done. It was something that I did back in the early 1990s starting my business, helping our manufacturing companies compete and keep their jobs here in the United States. One person who I would like to highlight tonight, a man who has become my friend, but also somebody who pursued that vision himself, was a man named George Hammond. He runs Hammond's Automotive. He started with its first operation in Covington, Kentucky, over 20 years ago. He took that chance that many Americans take to pursue the American Dream. He started off with a mechanics shop. The reason that his automotive shop grew in customers was not by popular advertising, it wasn't by media, it was by word of mouth, because the character of George and all the folks who worked with him demonstrated a desire to care for their customers and to make a difference, and they got more business and they grew. They opened a body shop. Suddenly, the things that they began to encounter were the regulatory system that was increasing costs upon them as they were repairing cars. But even with that, he continued to grow beyond the impact of the regulatory system, hiring more people. As a result of the tax policy that has taken place over the last 6 years, where people are allowed to keep more of their own money, unlike sending it to bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., where we may not know how it is going to be spent, George took that and he reinvested it. He reinvested it in his people, in training, and most recently opened another business in Burlington, Kentucky, moving out into the suburbs from Covington where he is reaching more and more people, all by word of mouth, and there a following that is going with that. But I don't know what would have happened to George Hammond if he did not have that flexibility, if he had the tax increase that is coming down the road at the end of 2010, in 1,398 days. He probably wouldn't have had that opportunity to grow his business and create that opportunity. But instead of raising taxes, we have created taxpayers with this policy. This is a family-friendly policy. That is a policy that allows people to pay for college tuition. It allows them to invest in their children's future. And for George Hammond, not only did it benefit him, but it benefited all of the employees, now going into a second generation of employees with three different business units that are creating jobs, creating a future for folks right there in Boone County and in Kenton County, Kentucky.