Virginia Foxx

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate an outstanding leader in the North Carolina community college system, Dr. Mary Rittling, president of Davidson County Community College. Dr. Rittling was honored in April as the 2012 North Carolina Community College President of the Year. This award is designed to honor outstanding leaders within North Carolina's community college system. Dr. Rittling's relentless focus on ``what can be'' versus ``what is'' drove critical changes to the college that helped the community adapt during a time when Davidson County and the rest of America suffered from job loss. This is not the first time Dr. Rittling has been recognized for her efforts on behalf of the students and the community. She has been recognized in the Triad as an Exceptional Leader in both 2009 and 2010. She was also named as the Outstanding Woman in Business by the Lexington Area Chamber of Commerce in 2009. Thanks to Dr. Rittling for her dedication to serving her community and her investment in Davidson and Davie Counties. Congratulations on her many achievements and recognition of her student-centered philosophy.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I highlight an example of how private sector businesses grow and contribute to our society when they're not suffocated by unnecessarily high taxes, and to dispel a myth that our colleagues continue to perpetuate about energy taxes. On April 24, The Wall Street Journal ran an article calling Apple Inc. ``the most valuable company'' in the world. Am I happy about that? Am I happy about Apple's success? You bet I am, and so are most people in the United States. Later that week, on April 28, The New York Times wrote a similar article that reported on Apple's creative, but legal, tax strategy that saves them billions in tax payments each year. The Times article reported ``the company paid cash taxes of $3.3 billion around the world on its reported profits of $34.2 billion last year, a tax rate of 9.8 percent.'' Comparatively, Wal-Mart paid a tax rate of 24 percent. When Apple was asked for comments on their exceptionally low tax rate, they responded: ``By focusing on innovation, we've created entirely new products and industries, and more than 500,000 jobs for U.S. workers--from the people who create components for our products to the people who deliver them to our customers.'' They also mentioned: ``In the first half of fiscal year 2012, our U.S. operations have generated almost $5 billion.'' Mr. Speaker, Apple's experiences are instructive to us. First, the Federal Tax Code is too complicated. It allows only the largest companies who can afford to hire tax code interpreters to benefit from lower taxes. We should simplify the tax code by closing the loopholes and lower rates across the board to boost American competitiveness for all companies, large and small. Both history and Apple's experience underscore how increasing taxes without accompanying comprehensive reform has never and will never represent a sustainable, long-term strategy to any budgetary problems. On the contrary, cutting taxes does create economic growth, which fuels Federal revenue windfalls for reducing the deficit. These lessons should be applied to the entire tax code. Instead of increasing taxes on American energy producers, we should focus on simplifying the federal code to encourage the development of domestic energy resources which, in turn, bolsters employment opportunities here at home. Again, am I pleased about Apple's success? Absolutely. But we never hear from our Democrat friends about the low tax rates paid by companies like Apple. However, they attack domestic energy producers and ignore the simple truth that it is the American people who actually own these companies and benefit from the respective profits that they make. According to the American Petroleum Institute, mutual funds hold almost 30 percent of oil stocks; pension funds hold 27 percent; individual investors hold 23 percent; 14 percent is held in individual retirement accounts; other institutional investments hold 5 percent; and corporate management holds just 1.5 percent. Despite what liberal Democrats would have you believe, increasing domestic energy production not only helps lower prices and produce jobs; it also helps boost stocks, mutual funds, IRAs, and pension funds owned by millions of Americans. It is also worth recognizing how hypocritical it is for liberal Democrats to complain about the federal tax treatment of domestic energy production while ignoring the market distorting impact of their favored subsidization of failed wind, solar and ``green car'' projects. The simple truth is that American energy producers, such as those in the oil development business, receive the same tax treatment as other U.S. industries. For those truly interested in ``fairness,'' the difference between ``subsidies'' and ``deductions'' should not be ignored or distorted. It's time that we as government officials get out of the way. Instead of increasing the bureaucracy and red tape, we need to focus on creating an environment for American private sector businesses to compete more easily in the global marketplace and give back to local communities in the form of jobs rather than sending more money to the Federal Government.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. I rise today to highlight an example of how private sector businesses grow and contribute to our society when they're not suffocated by unnecessarily high taxes, and I rise to dispel a myth that our colleagues continue to perpetuate about energy taxes. On April 24, The Wall Street Journal ran an article calling Apple Incorporated ``the most valuable company'' in the world. Am I happy about that? Am I happy about Apple's success? You bet I am, and so are most people in the United States. Later that week, on April 28, The New York Times wrote a similar article that reported on Apple's creative but legal tax strategy that saves them billions in tax payments each year. The Times article reported ``the company paid cash taxes of $3.3 billion around the world on its reported profits of $34.2 billion last year, a tax rate of 9.8 percent.'' Comparatively, Wal-Mart paid a tax rate of 24 percent. When Apple was asked for comments on their exceptionally low tax rate, they responded: By focusing on innovation, we've created entirely new products and industries, and more than 500,000 jobs for U.S. workers--from the people who create components for our products to the people who deliver them to our customers. They also mentioned: In the first half of fiscal year 2012, our U.S. operations have generated almost $5 billion in Federal and State income taxes. Mr. Speaker, Apple's experiences are instructive to us. First, the Federal Tax Code is too complicated. It allows only the largest companies who can afford to hire Tax Code interpreters to benefit from lower taxes. We should simplify the Tax Code by closing the loopholes and lower rates across the board to boost American competitiveness for all companies large and small. Both history and Apple's experience underscore how increasing taxes without accompanying comprehensive reform has never and will never represent a sustainable, long-term strategy to any budgetary problems. On the contrary, cutting taxes does create economic growth, which fuels Federal revenue windfalls for reducing the deficit. These lessons should be applied to the entire Tax Code. Instead of increasing taxes on American energy producers, we should focus on simplifying the Federal code to encourage the development of domestic energy resources which, in turn, bolsters employment opportunities here at home. Again, am I pleased about Apple's success? Absolutely. But we never hear from our Democrat friends about the low tax rates paid by companies like Apple. However, they attack domestic energy producers and ignore the simple truth that it is the American people who actually own these companies and benefit from the respective profits that they make. According to the American Petroleum Institute, mutual funds and other firms hold almost 30 percent of oil stocks; pension funds hold 27 percent; individual investors hold 23 percent; 14 percent is held in individual retirement accounts; other institutional investments hold 5 percent; and corporate management holds just 1.5 percent. Despite what liberal Democrats would have you believe, increasing domestic energy production not only helps lower prices and produce jobs; it also helps boost stocks, mutual funds, IRAs, and pension funds owned by millions of Americans. Democrats constantly talk about subsidies to oil and energy companies. Our energy companies don't receive any subsidies. That is a myth that they perpetuate. Solyndra got a subsidy--lots of these new energy types get subsidies--but not the traditional energy companies. It's time that we as government officials get out of the way. Instead of increasing the bureaucracy and red tape, we need to focus on creating an environment for American private sector businesses to better compete in the global marketplace and give back to local communities in the form of jobs rather than sending more money to the Federal Government.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, given the significance of this week to the U.S.-Azerbaijan bilateral relationship, it is important to commemorate the 20th Anniversary of the Occupation of Shusha in Azerbaijan. Shusha lies within the Nagorno-Karabakh region of Azerbaijan and is another painful reminder of the ongoing conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia in the region. Twenty years ago today, Armenian forces stormed the strategically important town of Shusha, which lies on a hill just over three miles away from the Nagorno-Karabakh capital of Stepanakert. The town was attacked at the break of dawn from three sides, trapping Azeri military units and civilians on their hilltop. For hours the town was shelled, killing and wounding thousands of men, women, and children, and the attacking forces have occupied it ever since. As a result of this tragic incident, the rich history and culture of Shusha remains inaccessible to the Azeri people who are prohibited from visiting the ancient Azeri museums, religious sites, musical schools, and historical sites of their past. Despite four United Nations resolutions insisting that the Nagorno- Karabakh region--and by extension, the town of Shusha--legally belongs to Azerbaijan, the region remains war-torn and steeped in conflict. Today we remember those who died defending their homeland and support those who are still affected, unable to return to the homes from which they were separated. My hope is that this anniversary will provide another opportunity to work together to ensure a peaceable, lasting resolution to the Nagorno- Karabakh conflict so that people from both nations will no longer suffer.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, Turkish-Americans and Turkish people throughout the world are commemorating April 23 as National Sovereignty and Children's Day and I happily join them. On April 23, 1920, during the War of Independence, the Grand National Assembly met in Ankara to lay the foundation of a new, independent, and secular Republic, born from the ashes of the Ottoman Empire. President Mustafa Kemal Ataturk openly declared that it was absolutely necessary to form a government that would be the ``destiny of the country'' governed ``by the determination and will of the Turkish nation as expressed in the Grand National Assembly.'' President Ataturk dedicated April 23 to the children of the country to emphasize that they are the future of the new nation. Following the victory over invading forces and the signing of the Treaty of Lausanne on July 24, 1923, Ataturk began to create the first predominantly Muslim secular, pluralistic, and westward-looking democracy. Over the next eight years, Ataturk embarked on ambitious and sweeping reforms in education, women's rights, and the judicial system. Today, Turkey stands as a model for other countries looking to shed their past and join the international community of democratic countries. Every year, the children in Turkey celebrate this National Sovereignty and Children's Day as a national holiday. Schools participate in week-long ceremonies marked by performances in all fields in large stadiums watched by the entire nation. Among the activities included on this day is one in which the children send their peer representatives to work with state officials and high ranking bureaucrats in their offices. The President, the Prime Minister, the Cabinet Ministers, and provincial governors all work with children in their offices. These children, in turn, sign executive orders relating to educational and environmental policies. On this day, the children also replace the parliamentarians in the Grand National Assembly and hold a special session to discuss matters concerning children's issues. The importance of April 23 as a special day for children has spread to the international community. The United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) decided to recognize this important day as International Children's Day. Congratulations to the country of Turkey on the occasion of National Sovereignty and Children's Day.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. I thank the gentleman for yielding time. I want to say that our colleagues reveal their attitude toward taxpayer money when they say this will cost us. The attitude of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle, Mr. Speaker, is that all the money that hardworking taxpayers earn belongs to the government. This doesn't cost us; this allows some people to keep more of their money. I rise today in support of H.R. 9, the Small Business Tax Cut Act, which would provide America's private sector with the resources needed to help supercharge desperately needed hiring. It's worth mentioning how this bill will benefit women since one- third of the firms directly benefiting from the act are owned by women. In North Carolina, small businesses with between one and 500 employees employ 205,490 individuals; 23,348 of those businesses are women-owned. Mr. Speaker, it's for these reasons I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 9.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this rule. I yield back the balance of my time, and I move the previous question on the resolution.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I want to point out that our colleagues across the aisle, as well as President Obama, the answer to everything is to raise taxes, but they never can explain how raising taxes would lower costs, especially on gasoline. To me, that shows how disconnected they are from economic reality. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. As my colleague knows, yesterday, in the Rules Committee, people on his side of the aisle talked about tax breaks and giveaways, and that, again, implies that all the money that hardworking taxpayers earn is government money, and that is not the way it is. That attitude about giving away money from the Federal Government implies that the money belongs to the government. I would also like to point out to my colleague that the subsidies he talks about are not subsidies. They are the tax deductions, tax ``breaks'' that every manufacturer gets, not just the oil companies. To talk about corporate welfare is a bit disingenuous. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. When I'm finished. I believe the gentleman from Colorado probably has adequate time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I want to point out to my colleague from Massachusetts that if we raise taxes on the oil companies, surely that will be passed along to consumers.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. We have no remaining speakers, and I am prepared to close if the gentleman is prepared to close.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Again, I want to point out to my colleague from Vermont that it was under Democrats that this authorization expired. They renewed the authorization six times while they were in control of both Houses of Congress and had the Presidency, so they haven't done the job they should have done. I also want to point out that the President has the tools he needs through agencies already to do the investigations that need to be done; they have done them over and over again and they've found no fault on the part of ``speculators'' or the oil companies. All the President and his allies on the other side of the aisle are doing, Mr. Speaker, is trying to distract people from their failed economic policies. Every policy that they have instituted has failed miserably, brought us record unemployment, and brought record gas prices. He blames, blames, blames other people, takes no responsibility, refuses to be held accountable for anything that this administration has done, that the Democrats, when they were in charge of the Congress for 4 years, did which created this situation. I think it's time that they quit casting blame and look for ways to solve problems, like encouraging the President to approve the Keystone pipeline and increasing the real supply, not 17 hours' worth of fuel from the strategic oil reserve. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I think I should remind my colleague from Colorado that the Democrats were in charge of both Houses of the Congress and had the Presidency when the authorization for this bill first expired, and I believe they reauthorized it several times and weren't able to get a bill passed. I would now like to yield 4 minutes to my distinguished colleague from Louisiana (Mr. Boustany).

Ms. FOXX. House Resolution 619 provides for a structured rule providing for consideration of H.R. 4348, a bill which extends the Federal highway, transit, and highway safety programs through the end of fiscal year 2012 and establishes program funding levels consistent with the fiscal year 2012 appropriated levels. The highway trust fund taxes and expenditure authority are also extended through fiscal year 2012. The Federal surface transportation programs and highway trust fund taxes and expenditure authority are currently authorized through June 30, 2012. Mr. Speaker, the underlying bill today extends the authority of the government to fund highway programs through the end of this fiscal year. In addition, the bill provides for the approval of the Keystone XL pipeline by giving the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 30 days to approve the Keystone XL pipeline expansion, and also includes language contained in H.R. 3096, the Resources and Ecosystem Sustainability, Tourist Opportunities, and Revived Economies of the Gulf Coast States, or RESTORE, Act which would establish the Gulf Coast Restoration Trust Fund and dedicate 80 percent of penalties paid by the responsible parties in connection with the Deepwater Horizon oil spill to the restoration of the gulf coast ecosystem and economy. Mr. Speaker, our constituents are feeling great real pains at the pump, and their pains are being ignored by the President and his liberal extremist enablers in Congress. Recent polls indicate that 63 percent of Americans say increases in gas prices have caused financial hardship for their families. My Democratic colleagues may be well served to ignore their Occupy Wall Street handlers for a moment and recognize that, as gas prices increase, it costs more to transport food and other essential goods and services, which lowers the standard of living for all Americans. The simple truth is that when President Obama was sworn into office in January 2009, the price of a gallon of gasoline was $1.84. Today, in many parts of our country, it's over $5 a gallon. My guess is this is not the kind of change that most Americans were expecting or wanted when President Obama promised change. Maybe since the President doesn't fill up his own gas tank, he does not fully appreciate this reality. These steeply rising gas prices have major ripple effects. Higher energy costs destroy jobs and leave families with less money to meet their basic needs. One of the most well-known precepts of economics is the principle of supply and demand, and the price of gasoline is not immune to this basic principle. That's why we need to increase the supply of all American energy sources to get us to American energy independence. Republicans have crafted and passed legislation that would not only lower the price of gas, but create jobs at the same time. Unfortunately, the liberal Democrat-controlled Senate stubbornly refuses to move these bills through the process. It's better to produce our own American energy and create American jobs rather than rely on unstable, hostile foreign regimes for critical energy resources. It seems that Democrats subscribe to the wisdom of President Obama's Energy Secretary who proclaimed that ``we somehow have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.'' Mr. Speaker, in Italy gas prices exceed $9 per gallon. The Obama energy policy consists of ignoring the needs of Americans and pleasing his liberal base, rather than working for all Americans. Congressional Democrats persist in their claim that increasing domestic oil and natural gas production will not immediately decrease the price of gasoline. For decades, this argument has been used as an excuse to continue stalling. We can no longer delay and deny access to our own American resources. Another false claim of congressional liberals is that the oil producers are somehow responsible for the high price of gasoline, even though official government investigations have shown time and again no wrongdoing. But they insist on tying their fundamental disdain for capitalism into the claim that denying fair tax treatment to domestic energy producers that is provided to every other industry will somehow lower gas prices. Well, Mr. Speaker, increasing taxes on American energy producers will only make the price of gasoline higher for families and job creators because affected companies simply pass their increased costs on to customers in order to stay in business. In what universe does making something more expensive to produce make it cheaper to sell? The simple truth is that domestic energy producers are essential to the U.S. economy, job creation, energy security, and deficit reduction. It supports more than 9 million jobs and adds more than $1 trillion to the U.S. economy each year. Today, the energy industry pays over $86 million a day in income taxes, royalties, bonuses, and rents to the Federal Government. Between 1996 and 2007, the industry invested more than $1.2 trillion in a range of long-term energy initiatives, compared to net income or earnings of $974 billion. The reality is that failure to produce domestic energy supplies, along with global turmoil and competition for supplies with developing nations, has driven up energy prices and boosted foreign energy companies that do not pay American taxes, nor comply with American environmental standards. House Republicans are now bringing forward yet another bill that will have the dual impact of lowering gas prices while supporting job creation. Republicans remain committed to solutions that promote America's energy independence, lower gas prices, and help create American jobs. With that, Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

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

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis), 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, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 619 and ask for its immediate consideration.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, the March employment report continues to show us that the Federal Government has not been helping to create jobs in our economy. A Wall Street Journal editorial from April 9 highlighted a few examples from the report. Here is one extremely startling statistic: The labor force participation rate--or the share of civilian population that is working--dropped again to 63.8 percent. In March, 2009, a month after the $800 billion stimulus passed Congress, the labor participation rate was nearly 2 percentage points higher, at 65.6 percent. This is a prime example that continuously throwing money of hardworking taxpayers that the Federal Government takes from them at the problem will not solve it. We need real solutions that will stimulate our proven economic engine: small businesses. That's why I support the Small Business Tax Cut Act that will help 22 million hardworking small businesses retain and create more jobs.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank my two colleagues who spoke on behalf of my amendment and tell them how much I appreciate their comments. And I want to say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, if designating an area as a national monument would be such a good idea, there shouldn't be any problem with gaining approval from the legislatures and the Governor, and it takes no power away from the President but allows the States to be part of the process. I encourage my colleagues to support my amendment and yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to my distinguished colleague from Utah (Mr. Bishop).

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I now yield 40 seconds to the distinguished chairman of the committee, Mr. Hastings.

Ms. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As a supporter of H.R. 4089, I rise today to offer an amendment which would add another positive element to the underlying bill. As we all know, the Antiquities Act of 1906 authorized the President to designate national monuments on Federal lands that contain historical landmark structures or other objects of scientific interest. This authority has been used 129 times by Presidents of both parties to designate such national treasures as the Grand Canyon, Grand Teton, and the Statute of Liberty. As someone who has enjoyed and appreciated some of the abundance of national and historic treasures throughout this great country, I greatly appreciate the importance of protecting these great blessings. Currently, a National Monument designation allows for the President to impose unilaterally further restrictions on the use of Federal lands. Since State authorities are more aware of the local circumstances affecting land restrictions, I've offered a standalone bill, H.R. 302, the Preserve Land Freedom for Americans Act of 2011, which is the model for the amendment I'm now offering. This amendment provides for accountability to the process by requiring the approval of the legislatures and Governors of the States where monuments are proposed to be located. With the Federal Government currently owning such a large percentage of land throughout the country, particularly in Western States, it's important to respect and allow State policymakers to weigh in on proposed Federal land restrictions within their borders. With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.