Virginia Foxx

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it be in order at any time to consider House Concurrent Resolution 134 in the House; that the concurrent resolution be considered as read; and that the previous question be considered as ordered on the concurrent resolution and preamble to adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the question except 30 minutes of debate equally divided and controlled by Representative Coffman of Colorado and Representative Perlmutter of Colorado or their respective designees.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman from California for yielding time. I rise today in support of the regulatory reform package before us today and in particular title IV of H.R. 4078, the Red Tape Reduction and Small Business Job Creation Act, which embodies my bill, H.R. 373, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act. My bill represents the first comprehensive reform modernizing the bipartisan Unfunded Mandates Reform Act since its inception in 1995. This bill is supported by State government advocates, including the National Council of State Legislatures, which, in a letter to Subcommittee Chairman Lankford, stated that: UMRA has enduring shortcomings that your amendment corrects. In particular, expanding the scope of reporting requirements to include new conditions of grant aid is essential. NCSL's members repeatedly point to this exclusion in the underlying statute as one of the law's major flaws. This bill responds to those concerns by allowing a committee chairman or ranking member to request that the Congressional Budget Office perform an assessment comparing the authorized level of funding in a bill or resolution to the prospective costs of carrying out any changes to a condition of Federal assistance being imposed on any respective participating State, local or tribal government. The purpose of this provision is to highlight costs the Federal Government is passing along to State and local governments that would otherwise remain hidden but are borne by taxpayers regardless of which governmental entity is taxing them. This provision represents just one of the many reasons I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. House Resolution 738 is a structured rule providing for consideration of H.R. 6082, the Congressional Replacement of President Obama's Energy-Restricting and Job-Limiting Offshore Drilling Plan, from the Natural Resources Committee and Chairman Hastings, and seven other bills that will be considered as a single package, including mine, H.R. 373, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act; H.R. 4078, the Regulatory Freeze for Jobs Act by Mr. Griffin; H.R. 4607, the Midnight Rule Relief Act by Mr. Ribble; H.R. 3862, the Sunshine for Regulatory Decrees and Settlements Act by Mr. Quayle; H.R. 4377, the RAPID ACT by Mr. Ross of Florida; H.R. 2308, the SEC Regulatory Accountability Act by Mr. Garrett; and H.R. 1840, which is a bill by Mr. Conaway to improve consideration by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission of the cost and benefits of its regulations and orders. H.R. 6082 is a bill to replace the Obama administration's final offshore drilling plan announced on June 28, which keeps 85 percent of America's offshore areas off limits to energy production, with one that would establish a timeline for 29 specific leases, some of which are not open for drilling under the Obama plan. The legislation would also require the Interior Department to prepare a multilease environmental impact statement for any leases required under the bill not in the June 2012 plan. The remaining bills are rolled into one package; and while each has its own unique virtues, they're all intended to provide for Federal regulatory relief. H.R. 373 is the culmination of nearly 5 years of work to build on the success of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act, or UMRA, which is a bipartisan initiative that has not been modernized since its inception in 1995. Given his express support for regulatory reform, my hope is that President Obama will support my bill, which incorporates many of his ideas, including those embodied in Executive Order 13563. Mr. Speaker, so often we thank people for working on our legislation and for working in the Congress only at the time that they retire, but I want to give some thanks today for the hard work that's been done, particularly on H.R. 373. There's an enormous amount of work that has gone into bringing this bill to the floor. I'd first like to thank Brandon Renz, my legislative director, who has worked with this for over 5 years. I thank Kristin Nelson and Peter Warren with the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee for providing the diligence and creative thinking needed to shape the product we're considering today. I also thank Ryan Little, Austin Smythe, Daniel Flores, and Hugh Halpern for their help shepherding this bill through the various committees of jurisdiction. It's this kind of cooperation that's necessary to ensure the proper functioning of this legislative body. I thank Chairman Darrell Issa for bringing this bill to the Oversight and Government Reform Committee. He is providing extraordinary leadership for that committee and our country. But it's my colleague and good friend, Congressman James Lankford, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee's Subcommittee on Technology, Information Policy, Intergovernmental Relations and Procurement Reform, who is deserving of my most sincere appreciation and praise. Mr. Lankford's dogged work and determination to build upon and improve on my initiative is only one demonstration of his keen intellect and exceptional legislative acumen. For a freshman with no prior legislative experience to have received such immense respect by peers of both parties further underscores his professionalism and amiable personality. Undoubtably, this House would be better off if it were filled with legislators as serious about seeking tangible solutions to problems as Mr. Lankford and Mr. Issa. Mr. Speaker, it's on that note that I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying bill and reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, the various elements of the comprehensive reform contained in title IV of the underlying bill can be overwhelming, which is why it may be helpful to elaborate on the purpose of some of the most prominent individual provisions within the package. In that light, it is important for the American people to understand the oppressive nature and full scope of the costs associated with complying with Federal mandates. As a former small business owner, I experienced a myriad of costly, overly burdensome Federal mandates, and I hear from my constituents every day about the challenges that they face in dealing with them. In my position as chairwoman of the House Subcommittee on Higher Education and Workforce Training, I have become familiar with an example of a ridiculous rule that will unnecessarily complicate student access to higher education. As we all know, in recent months, students and families have urged Congress to act to stem the ever-increasing cost of higher education. In response, the Obama administration has offered several proposals claiming to reduce student loan debt and rein in tuition. However, these initiatives only further entrench the Federal Government in the affairs of States and institutions. In response, higher education officials are crying foul over a 2010 Department of Education rule establishing a Federal definition of a credit hour. Higher education personnel believe this regulation will restrict innovation, limit flexibility, and pave the way for additional Federal overreach into higher education. As we've seen many times before, onerous Federal regulation always come with a price, which in this case is paid by students or their families. It's time to take a comprehensive view of the problems facing our Nation's higher education system and eliminate burdensome Federal regulations that pile unnecessary costs on institutions and students. Rather than getting the Federal Government further entrenched in higher education, we should be working together to remove costly mandates that pile unnecessary financial burdens on colleges and universities. Mr. Speaker, I enter into the Record a statement from the 2012 edition of ``Ten Thousand Commandments'' issued by the Competitive Enterprise Institute relative to the explosive growth of regulations by Federal agencies in the past 2 years. Mr. Speaker, again I want to say that Republicans, contrary to what our colleagues have said across the aisle, are not opposed to all regulations and rules. We are not opposed to government. We understand that we have to have government in order to have a civil society. We understand that we have to have regulations to protect us in some cases from each other and to make sure that we have an orderly society. We live in the greatest country in the world, Mr. Speaker; and we got here not because of the government, but we got here because of the hardworking Americans who have good values, who love this country and want to see it continue to thrive. We can count on those hardworking Americans to do the right things in almost every case. What Republicans want are commonsense regulations, and we want to stop the flood of regulations that have come particularly from this administration. And the materials that I have submitted to the Record, Mr. Speaker, will document the unnecessary rules and regulations that have come, particularly in this administration. We have heard today many reasons for Congress and President Obama to pursue Federal regulatory reform as a cost-free way in which the Federal Government can promote economic growth. We have the worst deficit, the worst debt we've ever had in this country. We have an unemployment rate that is stifling economic growth. What we're proposing here today will help our economy, will help revive our economy, and will bring jobs to this country. This legislative package, with the passage of this rule, represents a variety of ways we can move towards these ends. As Americans look to Congress for innovative solutions to spur private sector job growth, I call on my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation. The 2011 Federal Register stands at 81,247 pages. That number is just shy of 2010's all-time record-high 81,405 pages. These years are the only two in which the number of Federal Register pages topped 81,000. In 2011, agencies issued 3,807 final rules, compared with 3,573 in 2010, a 6.5-percent increase. Proposed rules appearing in the Federal Register increased even more than the number of final rules, from 2,439 to 2,898, an 18.8-percent increase that signals a likely future rise in final rules. Although regulatory agencies issued 3,807 final rules in 2011, Congress passed and the president signed into law a comparatively few 81 bills. Substantial lawmaking power is delegated to unelected bureaucrats at agencies. Of the 4,128 regulations now in the pipeline, 822 affect small businesses and 212 are `economically significant' rules wielding at least $100 million in economic impact. That number represents a 32.5-percent jump over the 160 rules five years ago, in 2006, and a higher level than any year of the past decade except for the 224 rules in 2010. The number of final `major rule' reports issued by agencies and reviewed by the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has grown. The 99 rules of 2010 represented the highest number since this tabulation began. Five years ago, there were 56 such reports. The five most active rule-producing agencies--the departments of the Treasury, Commerce, the Interior, and Agriculture, along with the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)--account for 1,733 rules, or 42 percent of all rules in the Unified Agenda pipeline. The government's reach extends well beyond the taxes Washington collects and its deficit spending and borrowing. Federal environmental, safety and health, and economic regulations cost hundreds of billions--perhaps trillions--of dollars every year over and above the costs of the official federal outlays that dominate the policy debate. Economics 101 on tax incidence explains how and why firms generally pass along to consumers the costs of some taxes. Likewise, some regulatory compliance costs that businesses face will find their way into the prices consumers pay and into wages earned. Taxation and regulation can substitute for each other because regulation can advance government initiatives without using tax dollars. Rather than pay directly and book expenses for new programs, the government can require the private sector--as well as state and local governments--to pay for federal initiatives through compliance costs. Because such regulatory costs are not budgeted and lack the formal public disclosure of federal spending, they may generate comparatively little public outcry. Regulation thus becomes a form of off-budget or hidden taxation. As the mounting federal debt causes concern, the impulse to regulate instead can also mount. Deficit spending, in a manner of speaking, can manifest itself as regulatory compliance costs that go largely unacknowledged by the federal government. Worse, if regulatory compliance costs prove burdensome, Congress can escape accountability by blaming the agencies that issue the unpopular rules. Openness about regulatory facts and figures is critical, just as disclosure of program costs is critical in the federal budget . . . [But] Disclosure of and accountability for regulatory costs are spotty. This allows policy makers to be reckless about imposing regulatory costs relative to undertaking ordinary-- but more publicly visible--government spending. The material previously referred to by Mr. Hastings of Florida is as follows: An Amendment to H. Res. 738 Offered by Mr. Hastings of Florida At the end of the resolution, add the following new section: Sec. 3 It shall not be in order to consider a concurrent resolution providing for adjournment or adjournment sine die unless the House has been notified that the President has signed a bill to extend for one year certain expired or expiring tax provisions that apply to middle-income taxpayers with income below $250,000 for married couples filing jointly, and below $200,000 for single filers, including, but not limited to, marginal rate reductions, capital gains and dividend rate preferences, alternative minimum tax relief, marriage penalty relief, and expanded tax relief for working families with children and college students.

Ms. FOXX. That would be fine with me, Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman is prepared to close. I will have some more comments to make, and then I will close.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The rule before us today provides for consideration of my bill, H.R. 373, the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act, as I mentioned before. While working on this legislation over the years, I have come to appreciate that the subject matter is not one of the most thrilling ever to be considered by this House. In fact, I'm confident that reading a summary of my bill would provide an effective remedy for even the most stubborn case of insomnia. Some have compared observing the legislative process with that of making sausage. Admittedly, in the case of my bill, it more closely resembles watching paint dry. Nor do I expect many in the media will sell many advertisements dissecting legislation entitled the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act. However, this certainly does not diminish the meaning or value of this important work. By collaborating with the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, we've worked to create a comprehensive legislative package that promotes the principles of good government, accountability, and transparency that my constituents sent me to Congress to represent. These principles have been a top priority of mine throughout my legislative career, starting in the North Carolina State Senate. Very simply, H.R. 373 advances these priorities by drawing upon bipartisan initiatives to expand access to information. The legislative text, itself, identifies the stated purpose of H.R. 373 as improving: the quality of the deliberations of Congress with respect to proposed Federal mandates by providing Congress and the public with more complete information about the effects of such mandates, ensuring that Congress acts on such mandates only after focused deliberation on their effects while enhancing the ability of Congress and the public to identify Federal mandates that may impose undue harm on consumers, workers, employers, small businesses, and State, local, and tribal governments. But it does so much more than that. The strength of the bill is that it serves to inform more fully decision-makers engaged in the policymaking process while letting affected State and local governments and those in the private sector who must put Washington dictates into practice know what's coming and better participate in the process. Many provisions of the bill simply codify, clarify, and streamline existing practice. Others enhance the purpose of UMRA by applying its disclosure requirements to more circumstances while initiating more complete, detailed, useful, and accurate cost estimates to expose otherwise hidden costs. Yet others still protect legislative intent by closing loopholes in current law, allowing enterprising rule-makers to circumvent disclosure requirements while imposing costly mandates. All of these provisions are harmonized in a way that provides something for everyone--which, unfortunately, is a rare legislative virtue--yet underscores the unique opportunity Members of both parties have to vote for a modest, yet effective legislative solution. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, as I often do when I'm handling a rule, I have to make sure that the public understands the facts. It's my understanding that the amendment that the gentleman spoke of that was adopted in the committee and then presented in the way that it was presented for this bill was not germane. I need to point out to the public that it was not the majority, it wasn't the Republicans, who decided the amendment wasn't germane. It is our Parliamentarians, who are nonpartisan. I would now like to yield 3\1/2\ minutes to my colleague from Texas, Representative Canseco.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the gentleman from Florida.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 3 minutes to my colleague from Florida (Mr. Ross).

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I just would like to point out to my colleague from Florida that we certainly agree on our side of the aisle with Governor Romney that we need regulations. These bills don't do away with all regulations. Republicans know you need government. We just want some common sense brought into our government. We want a cost- benefit analysis done to rules and regulations. After all, we're here, we're breathing the air, we're drinking the water, we're eating the food. Our children, our grandchildren are, too. It doesn't make any sense these tired old accusations against Republicans that we don't care anything about our environment or our food because we're here living with them, also. I don't think the American people are going to buy the arguments that my colleague made. I would now like to yield 5 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Lankford).

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 738 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Hastings), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only. General Leave

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. I want to thank members of the freshman class--I think people don't realize we call ourselves ``freshmen'' our first year here--for doing such a wonderful job of humanizing this bill. This is not the most exciting legislation that has ever passed the House of Representatives, and I have to say my piece of this legislation is probably one of the least exciting pieces of it. It's H.R. 373. It's called the Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act. It's pretty dull. I'll tell you, when you read it, if you need something to put you to sleep, it's a great thing to put you to sleep, but it is very important legislation. All seven pieces of the legislation that you all are talking about tonight have real impact on the public. I want to say, in 1995, when Republicans took over the majority for the first time in 40 years, they passed a bill with bipartisan support called the Unfunded Mandates bill. We all grew up hearing how the Federal Government was putting unfunded mandates on State and local governments. So they said, well, we're not going to do that anymore. We're going to figure out how much this costs, and if it costs over $100 million, we're not going to do it. Well, guess what? There were loopholes in the legislation. We hear about loopholes all the time in tax legislation, but you don't hear very many people talking about the loopholes that are out there that govern the bureaucracy. Well, there were lots of loopholes in the Unfunded Mandates bill, or UMRA. What my bill does is close those loopholes to keep the bureaucrats from getting around telling us how much these unfunded mandates are going to cost. For the first time ever, it is going to apply to the private sector so that we will really know--these rules and regulations that the gentleman from Indiana was talking about--how much they're going to cost that business that was almost put out of business. That's what we need to be doing. So the rules may go into effect, but this Congress is going to understand and the world is going to understand how much it is costing us, and that is very, very important. I thank you for letting me share a couple of minutes of your time tonight in order to bring some information forward about H.R. 373, which is a bipartisanly supported bill, as I think most of these bills are. So, while they are not exciting, they do good work.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding time. I want to associate myself with the words of my very capable and articulate colleague from Oklahoma (Mr. Cole), the author of this legislation. As he said, this should be a routine bill to be passed on suspension on the basis of his comments alone. However, some have chosen to try to divert, to take us away from the subject at hand of this bill. I support H.R. 2362, an important bill designed to bolster global economic cooperation by making it easier for Native American tribal communities to strengthen ties with foreign trading partners. Even though Native American communities suffer from the highest unemployment rate in the United States, economic development on tribal lands is stifled by a restrictive and archaic leasing system, requiring applicants to succumb to a multilayered review process, taking up to 6 years to complete. These unnecessary hurdles have compromised important tribal economic development in the past. For example, the Round Valley Indian Housing Authority continues to wait, after 9 years, for the Bureau of Indian Affairs to process a lease for a large housing project. And in 2006, the Swinomish and Walmart agreed to build a store on the reservation while the BIA regional office stalled for 2 years before Walmart withdrew from the deal following the 2008 financial crisis. This bill helps correct these problems by authorizing select tribes to develop guidelines for leasing land and services to both foreign and domestic companies for economic development purposes. The bill further provides for only one approval of the land leasing guidelines by the Interior Secretary, thereby reducing current multilayer, prohibitive land leasing laws. Without imposing any new costs, these changes will promote tribal job growth and economic empowerment, encourage foreign and domestic investments in Indian Country, all the while, inviting foreign and domestic companies to explore commercial opportunities with tribes. It's for these reasons that I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I couldn't believe my ears last Friday when President Obama made the revealing statement: if you have a business, you didn't build that. Someone else made that happen. The President's decision to speak as an authority on the private sector, where he has never staked his own livelihood, is baffling. The takeaway from his speech may be boiled down to this: it's not your smarts; it's not your work ethic. If not for the government, where would you be? Ask the entrepreneur who has taken real risk if that rings true. Ask the small business owner who took out a second mortgage to get his company off the ground. Ask those who wakened before dawn to fire up the ovens at their bakery or to tend to the needs on their farm. Was Washington a co-laborer in their work? Should Washington claim any credit for their success? Job creators stake their own money and security on their ventures and most do so without the safety net of a government grant or bailout. In America, not everyone chooses to take those risks and join the ranks of job creators; and among those who do, not everyone succeeds. But that is the symptom of a choice-driven free market and part of the beauty of our country. That is why our Declaration itemizes as one of our inalienable rights the pursuit of happiness. This is the understanding that the American Dream looks different for everyone and that through hard work, talent, choice, and opportunity, so too will its results. Inherent in the American psyche is the belief that hard work can change the course of a person's life. I know that to be true in my own life; and 63 percent of Americans share that belief, as opposed to 37 percent of French, 45 percent of Dutch, and 46 percent of Norwegians. That hope in hard work is among our country's greatest assets, and it is a tragedy that the principle was so diminished by our White House. You see, Mr. Speaker, I have a background as a small businesswoman. Together with my husband, Tom, we built an independent nursery and landscaping business in North Carolina more than 30 years ago, and it's still in our family today. I've seen what it takes to keep a small business afloat. The hours are long, the strain on the family can be significant, and you live with the knowledge that one sustained economic downturn could spell the end of your life's work. No one from the government was there when my husband and I worked in the rain and snow to finish jobs so we could get paid, or cut Christmas trees and load them when the temperature was so brutally cold we could hardly tie knots to keep them on a truck. No one from government was there in the wee hours of the morning when we were doing our regular jobs while at the same time working to start our business. Small businesses operate in a world of bottom lines Washington knows very little about. Unlike Washington, they don't have the luxury to deficit spend, print more money, or profess as ``spending cuts'' lower- than-anticipated growth. When the President claimed the American system ``allowed'' the successful to thrive, he made a dangerous error. Government doesn't allow its citizens to thrive, nor does it ``enable'' them to thrive or ``permit'' them to thrive. That language suggests government is a benefactor possessing the authority to give or take the blessings of open commerce as it sees fit. No, government does not ``allow'' you to thrive. Government, when it operates in its constitutional capacity, does not obstruct your thriving. Ask small business owners today and they will likely tell you they exist in spite of government's burdens and interference. Government already obligates small businesses to pay more than $10,000 per employee each year to comply with Federal regulations. That is money they are not directing toward hiring new employees. But even with that knowledge, Washington's regulatory tsunami continues. So do the taxes. In a faltering economy, job creation is of paramount importance; and when you raise taxes in a faltering economy, job creation is thwarted. The President acknowledged as much in 2009, but his policies run to the contrary. Perhaps the President's lack of familiarity with running a business in a recession is responsible for his insistence on increasing taxes on 940,000 small business tax filers in 2013. Perhaps it's because he doesn't know the ins and outs of private sector creation that he's willing to risk 710,000 American jobs on his tax crusade. We who know the private sector want to spare him that lesson. Taxes will devastate our economy. To grow it, every American should benefit from an extension of tax relief. Mr. Speaker, Washington didn't buy the American Dream for the millions of small businesses that comprise the backbone of our economy. Nor did Washington show up sick when a shift needed to be covered, miss soccer games because a shipment had to be received, or work graveyard because someone had to do it. Americans did that. Too quickly we forget that everything the government has it takes from taxpayers; and if taxpayers do poorly, so does the government. So Washington must remain mindful. If the policies it imposes make it harder for small businesses to grow and create jobs, and eliminate their ability to invest, it is Washington that will find itself in crisis as it is now.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. As the Nation sits beneath 41 straight months of unemployment above 8 percent, it remains painfully clear that the President's policies have failed and have made our economy worse. ``Painful'' is, indeed, the operative word. As we slog through the worst unemployment crisis since the Great Depression, Americans continue to ask, ``Where are the jobs?'' More than 23 million of our fellow Americans are unemployed. Almost 500,000 net jobs have evaporated since the President's so-called ``stimulus'' was enacted, and entrepreneurship--that cornerstone of the American Dream--has reached a 17-year low. This is President Obama's record, and these facts do not lie. House Republicans have a plan for America's job creators to help get our Nation back to work. Dozens of bipartisan bills have passed the House and are sitting on Harry Reid's doorstep. It is time he and the Democratic-controlled Senate put the American people before politics and pass these bills.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, in 2009, President Obama rightly said, ``The last thing you want to do is raise taxes in the middle of a recession.'' Yet the President's signature legislative achievement, ObamaCare, hinges on 21 separate tax increases, 12 of which hit the middle class. ObamaCare and its taxes have already proved crushing to the economy, along with broken promises to spur job creation, reduce debt, cut premium costs, and allow patients to keep their coverage and physicians. Family premiums are up over $1,000, 20 million people are at risk of losing the doctors they like, 48 percent of businesses aren't hiring to brace for rising health costs, and by 2021, the CBO estimates there will be 800,000 fewer jobs because of ObamaCare. The job of Congress is not to defend failure. ObamaCare makes it harder for job creators to hire and fails in its most basic objectives. Thus, we have a duty to spare the American people from its $1.76 trillion bill by fully repealing this legislation.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I rise today to recognize Ms. Cleone Hodges of Boone on the occasion of her 103rd birthday. A teaching position in Appalachian State University's Health Sciences department brought Ms. Hodges to Boone in 1938. Immediately, she was active in our community, serving 23 years as secretary for the parks department, teaching Sunday school at the First Baptist Church, and becoming active in community garden clubs. A scholarship in her name exists to support the work of students in her former department. Ms. Hodges' natural athletic talent helped her take the golf world by storm following retirement. On top of numerous regional wins, Hodges won three gold and two silver medals in national senior golf competitions. She scored the third of her career holes in one at the age of 93. Ms. Hodges, a 2005 inductee to the Watauga County Sports Hall of Fame, is a mother to her son, J.B., a grandmother to two, and a great- grandmother to three. With the rest of the Boone community, I wish her the happiest of birthdays and hope for many, many more.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, it is with sadness that I rise today to honor the memory of Major Ryan S. David of Boone, North Carolina, who was a member of the North Carolina Air National Guard. On July 1, his Charlotte-based C-130 crew crashed in South Dakota while battling the State's White Draw fire. Major David was an experienced navigator who joined the National Guard in 2011 after completing Active Duty service in the U.S. Air Force. He is survived by his wife, Jenny, and his infant son, Rob. Along with Major David, Lieutenant Colonel Paul Mikeal of Mooresville, Major Joseph McCormick of Belmont, and Senior Master Sergeant Robert Cannon of Charlotte gave their lives in service to our country. There's no question of the bravery and commitment of these men, and we are very grateful to them. My heart goes out to the families of these heroes and their Air National Guard colleagues. May God grant them comfort in this time of loss, and may He bless the sacrifices of these fallen.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, again, next week is the Fourth of July. We are going to be celebrating Independence Day, and I would like to say that I don't believe the job of the Federal Government is to provide things to citizens but to preserve our liberty, and that's what next week should be reminding us of. Mr. Speaker, House Republicans are aware of the clear mandate the American people gave us. Our charge is to reduce the crushing debt that our country is currently carrying. According to the Senate Budget Committee, debt grew four times faster under President Obama than Clinton or Bush, with President Obama already having amassed more debt since taking office than did President Bush during his entire two terms in office. Today, the national debt is over $15 trillion, which amounts to nearly $48,000 for every man, woman and child in America. It's clear without a change in leadership in the White House and Senate, the legacy we are apt to leave our children and grandchildren will be a crushing debt burden and a weaker, less secure, and less prosperous Nation. This is simply unacceptable. The Federal Government's current budget deficits are simply unsustainable. During these tough economic times, American families are getting by on less, and the government should do the same. When the Democrat elites were in the majority, they pushed a job- killing agenda starting with the $1 trillion failed stimulus package, followed by a massive job-killing tax hike in the form of cap-and- trade, then the job-killing ObamaCare, all the while leaving our country with record debts and deficits as unemployment skyrocketed. Recognizing that government has gotten too expensive, Republicans are here to stop the senseless Obama spending binge. That's why I urge my colleagues to support this rule and the underlying legislation.

Ms. FOXX. We are prepared to close when the gentleman is prepared to close.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I don't know about my colleagues across the aisle, it's not a paid vacation for me. I go home and spend time with my constituents and hear from them what's of concern. Maybe they're on vacation, but I know the people on our side of the aisle are not on vacation. They're working hard for the American people, and I reserve the balance of my time.