Virginia Foxx

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McClintock).

Ms. FOXX. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to my distinguished colleague from Tennessee, Mr. Duncan.

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

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I need to point out to the gentleman from Massachusetts that the manager's amendment incorporated 10 majority amendments. The only amendments that came in from the Republicans were put in in the names of the majority. There was only one Republican amendment made in order for today under the rule. I would like now to recognize for 3 minutes my colleague from Nebraska, Mr. Smith.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, this bill deserves the emperor's new clothes award. We all, again, want to see improved and increased use of solar energy in our country, but this rule and this bill are not going to do it. The bill before us authorizes $2.25 billion in borrowed money for the creation of a new committee which would devise a solar technology road map or plan. This wasteful spending does not reflect the hard economic times our country and our constituents are experiencing right now and, instead, is spending borrowed money that we do not have. Whenever I am home in North Carolina, which is every weekend, I hear from numerous constituents their concerns that the Federal Government in Washington is borrowing and spending too much. The American people know that in these tough economic times that they should save, not spend money. However, the Federal Government does not reflect the common sense I see throughout my district. Instead, the Democrats in charge here continue to borrow more and spend more, increasing our Federal deficit on the backs of our children and grandchildren. The money that Speaker Pelosi and the Obama administration want to authorize today is all borrowed money. We cannot say that often enough. We do not have this money. Our constituents do not have this money and the Federal Government does not have this money. The Democrats in charge have made the irresponsible decision to borrow it in order to spend it at their whim. Mr. Speaker, the U.S. national debt is currently $11.5 trillion. With over 300 million people in the United States today, each citizen's share of this debt right now is $38.8 thousand. This bill will increase the deficit even more by borrowing and spending money we don't have. We can no longer blame the deficit and economic difficulties today on the previous administration. Those in charge have shown they don't care about the deficit by continuing to dig America into a deeper and deeper hole with more reckless spending. This borrowed money is all being spent by Speaker Pelosi and the Obama administration. As a result, the unemployment rate continues to rise and the deficit continues to rise also. Since the Democrats took control of Congress on January 4, 2007, the national debt has increased by $3.282 trillion. Since President Obama was inaugurated just months ago in January, the national debt has increased by $1.325 trillion. The Department of the Treasury has reported that under the Democrats' control, 2009 is the worst fiscal year in this Nation's history. The results get more disastrous with each passing day. Mr. Speaker, the debt limit has been raised at least three times since 2008. A debt limit increase was included in H.R. 3221, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008. H.R. 1424, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 raised the debt limit again. The Democrats in charge raised the debt limit yet again less than a year later with passage of H.R. 1, the, quote, stimulus, in February of this year. That bill raised the debt limit to $12.104 trillion, where it now stands. As if that weren't enough, the fiscal year 2010 budget resolution adopted on April 29, 2009, triggered the automatic passage of a separate measure, House Joint Resolution 45, to raise the debt limit to $13.029 trillion, which was then sent to the Senate. We will soon be asked to raise the debt limit again just as soon as the majority can find a way to do it and hide it in some other bill so that the American people hopefully are fooled by what they are doing. They are not going to be fooled because they are paying attention to what's going on here in the Congress. I have opposed all these efforts to raise the debt limit. According to an analysis by The Heritage Foundation, the White House projects $10.6 trillion in new deficits over the next decade. This is nearly $80,000 per household in new borrowing. It's beyond time to stop digging. The new budget estimates, including an estimated total national debt of $24.5 trillion in 2019 under President Obama's budget, are alarming and unsustainable. The result will be the highest level of spending and debt in American history. This is an irresponsible lack of fiscal restraint carried on the backs of our children and grandchildren. My constituents at home and Americans across the Nation are not operating their family budgets as recklessly as this Congress is spending their taxpayer dollars. On top of all this, the President and Congress' shameless proposals to create a $1 trillion health care entitlement are careless and unaffordable. We should be focusing on capping Federal spending, restraining entitlements, and eliminating wasteful programs. When will the Democrats learn that out-of-control spending will not solve our Nation's problems? Last week, a group of us had the great opportunity to hear Mr. John Allison, who is chairman of the board of Branch Banking and Trust Company in North Carolina, one of the most successful banks in the United States. He told us then that we are on an unsustainable course in terms of accruing debt. He said if we do not stop this almost immediately, we have fewer than 25 years left as a great Nation, that within 25 years we will become a Third World country similar to other Third World countries, particularly in South America. We cannot sustain this. We owe our children and grandchildren a better future. We need alternatives. But what the Democrats in charge are doing is shutting off our opportunity to use alternative sources of energy that we have available to us in this country. We have plenty of oil, plenty of gas, plenty of coal. We could be using all of those sources of energy, but they are shutting us out. We should be utilizing those and not doing what our colleague from California showed, and that is wasting money on setting up committees to devise road maps to bridges to nowhere, when we could be developing the resources that we have, allowing the private sector to do it, and not having government involvement. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, while solar energy is an important resource and worthy of support, there are many flaws in this legislation and in the rule. This is not the right policy to advance our Nation's energy needs. As usual, the Democrats' approach to another problem is to take money from hardworking citizens to use for their pet projects and their supporters. This approach fails to incorporate creative solutions that do not rely on ever increasing the size of the Federal Government. According to the Science and Technology Committee, solar energy has been on the forefront for over 30 years, and yet it still makes up only 1 percent of the 7 percent of renewable energy consumed in the United States. Because there is no silver bullet, our Nation's energy policy must encompass many energy alternative solutions. Mr. Speaker, if the Democrats in charge were serious about achieving energy independence and freeing our Nation from the grip of foreign oil, they would bring legislation to the floor that invests in several energy initiatives, not just one. Republicans have alternatives. We have alternatives to everything that they have been presenting. We've introduced legislation that would encompass a multitude of energy initiatives, including solar technology. H.R. 2846, the American Energy Act, of which I'm a cosponsor, is a comprehensive energy solutions plan that would create jobs, make energy more affordable, diversify our energy sources, and help the U.S. become more energy independent. The American Energy Act would increase both the supply of American- made energy in environmentally sound ways and achieve the goal of energy independence for our Nation. Instead of investing billions in taxpayer dollars we don't have for one energy resource, the American Energy Act would establish a renewable energy trust fund using revenues generated by exploration in the deep ocean and on the Arctic coastal plain. It would permanently extend the tax credit for alternative energy production, including wind, solar and hydrogen; and it would eliminate barriers to the expansion of emission-free nuclear power production. The comprehensive strategy is budget neutral, without tax increases, and would make independence achievable without wasting billions of our constituents' dollars. But instead of taking real action, this bill places restrictions on solar technology research and development by requiring that the Secretary of Energy allocate at least 75 percent of funding to those solar R&D projects directed under the committee's road map. This leaves little flexibility for innovations that may be feasible and yet were not included in the road map. When Speaker Pelosi took office, she promised the Nation that this Congress would be the most open and honest in history. This bill works against that objective. At least one-third of the road map committee created by this bill is made up of industry officials who are explicitly exempted from the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which is intended to provide an open and transparent process. The Democrats in charge could have ensured the road map committee was open and transparent, but curiously they chose not to. When it comes to solar technology research and development, we must have the collaboration of the Department of Energy, universities and industries. However, this bill would create a committee, half of which could be industry, telling DOE where to direct taxpayer money into research and development that could benefit their companies while not having to answer to anyone or defend their recommendations. This is not a responsible policy when billions of taxpayer dollars are on the line. Mr. Speaker, H.R. 900, of which I'm a cosponsor, would liberate energy companies from being suffocated by extreme environmental litigation and allow them to move forward and get approval to implement energy products. Mr. Speaker, this rule is wrong. This bill is a bad bill. Since 2005, more than 200 applications have been submitted to the Bureau of Land Management for permission to build solar power projects on federally controlled land. To date, the Bureau of Land Management hasn't approved a single one of them. Mr. Rohrabacher has introduced H.R. 964, the Emergency Solar Power Permit Act, of which I am a cosponsor, to exempt solar energy projects from costly and prolonged environmental impact statement requirements. Enacting this legislation would do more to expedite solar energy than the underlying bill. Even though the public has repeatedly demanded to take advantage of the resources we have here at home, attempts to develop these resources are consistently and adamantly opposed by radical environmentalists who claim to be in favor of domestic development of renewable energy. The American people are suffering the consequences. The Democrats' radical environmentalist friends and campaign donors continue to block domestic energy development by imposing excessive environmental litigation on energy companies. This excessive litigation prevents our country from moving forward to implement policies that will develop renewable technology and free us from the grip of foreign oil. H.R. 900, of which I am a cosponsor, would liberate energy companies from being suffocated by extreme environmental litigation and allow them to move forward and get approval to implement energy projects. However, the Democrats in charge will not allow this bill to come to the floor for debate because they have more allegiance towards their radical environmentalist friends than towards the American people. Mr. Speaker, amendments to reduce the authorization, give the Secretary of DOE discretion as to how much funding should go to the Roadmap recommendations, and sunset the Roadmap Committee in 2015 were all voted down in the hearing on this legislation. Amendments to protect small businesses, veteran-owned businesses, and fund this bill through unspent funds authorized under the ``stimulus'' earlier this year were blocked by the Democrats on the Rules Committee so we will not be debating them in order to improve this flawed legislation. Because of this, Mr. Speaker, I oppose this rule and urge my colleagues to vote ``no.'' I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, if I can inquire of the gentleman from Colorado if he is prepared to close.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, we have no additional speakers, and I will make my closing speech now. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so an amendment can be added to the rule. The amendment to the rule would provide for separate consideration of H. Res. 554, a resolution to require that legislation and conference reports be posted on the Internet for 72 hours prior to consideration by the House. It does not affect the bill made in order by the rule. The amendment to the rule provides the House will debate the issue of reading the bill within 3 legislative days. It does not disrupt the schedule. The bill currently has 164 cosponsors. The discharge petition has 182 names, including five Democrats. This bill has gained support of an overwhelming majority of Americans and is widely respected by government watchdogs. The existing House rule, that committee reports be available for 3 days prior to floor consideration, has been repeatedly waived by Republicans and Democrats alike. This is not a partisan measure. As Members of Congress, we ought to agree that regardless of the legislation brought before us, we should always have the opportunity to read and understand the legislation before we vote. The American public agrees with this commonsense position. A recent survey by Rasmussen Reports found that 83 percent of Americans say legislation should be posted online and available for everyone to read before Congress votes on it. The poll also found that this is not a partisan issue: 85 percent of Republicans, 76 percent of Democrats, and 92 percent of unaffiliated voters favor posting legislation online prior to its being voted on. In the beginning of the year, Democrat Members of this Congress voted to spend almost $790 billion in taxpayer dollars on a stimulus package that most Members did not even read. All Republicans voted ``no.'' The 1,073-page document wasn't posted on the government's Web site until after 10 p.m. the day before the vote to pass it was taken. Furthermore, before debate on the cap-and-tax bill offered last summer, the House was presented with a 300-plus-page amendment at 3 a.m. for debate the following morning and a vote the following afternoon. This was unacceptable and further demonstrated the need to read the bill and the amendments. Mr. Speaker, we are elected to Congress to represent our constituents. How are we supposed to determine what is right for our fellow Americans if we have to vote on something before we even have time to read it? We need to have this debate. If people oppose having the text of bills available to read, they should make their case. This amendment to the rule allows them to do just that. I urge my colleagues to defeat the previous question so that we can have this debate and do the right thing for the American people. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to have the text of the amendment and extraneous material inserted into the Record prior to the vote on the previous question.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the previous question and the rule and yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, today, during a rule debate, I voiced my concern over the breakneck increase in government spending in the U.S. I warned my fellow Americans that this reckless spending risked turning our country into a South American-style nation with a perpetually frail economy and government. One of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle retorted by highlighting the successes of nations such as Brazil or Argentina. That's very interesting. Shortly after our exchange, I read that Argentina recently enacted a press restriction law that serves to muzzle media critics of the party of President Cristina Kirchner. It seems that the media was getting too aggressive in exposing and critiquing the ruling party's corruption. Sounds like a really great model for free speech and expression; right? I hope that the newly elected Congress of Argentina scraps this law, and that we, as Americans, realize the gift that our form of government is and work together to preserve it. And, contrary to the advice of my colleague, hopefully the United States does not use this country's success as a model for reform.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. I said some countries in South America.

Ms. FOXX. No. I was talking about my concern for the spending that's going on here. And what I said was last week we heard from John Allison, who is the chairman of the board of Branch Banking and Trust Company, BB&T bank in North Carolina, one of the most successful banks in the country. And last week, Mr. Allison was here and was speaking to a group of us, and he cautioned us about the economic situation that we have. And he said, if we don't rein in spending almost immediately, he believes that we have fewer than 25 years left before we become a Third World country like countries in South America.

Ms. FOXX. I was basically quoting him, although not quoting him verbatim.

Ms. FOXX. I certainly feel the same way. Thank you, Mr. Polis.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. That is correct.

Ms. FOXX. Well, we have bills that talk about accessibility and portability. Portability, meaning we would all own our own health care insurance. If we lost our jobs, we take it with us. We want to give tax deductions to individuals.

Ms. FOXX. That's right. And the American people support that. We also support accessibility for people who have preexisting conditions. We support groups being able to band together and form larger groups to bring down the cost. So we support all those things the American people say they want.

Ms. FOXX. I don't know any Republicans that are opposed to it; and, frankly, I don't know any Democrats who've signed on. But what we need to point out again is that what the Democrat plans do is to cut existing Medicare programs to come up with sham funds to put in their new program. And with that I'm going to yield back, because the Rules Committee is currently meeting, and I'm going to have to go back there.

Ms. FOXX. Well, I want to thank the gentleman from Missouri for the yeoman work that he has done on leading these Special Orders to explain to the American people what's wrong with these plans that are being presented by our colleagues across the aisle, and pointing out that Republicans do have alternatives to what is being presented here. This morning, during 1-minutes, at least two of our colleagues got up and said, Republicans have no alternatives. And I think it's very important that we continue to point out that we are not just here to be critical of what has been proposed by the Democrats, but to say, yes, we have alternatives. Our alternatives don't cost any money. We can do whatever needs to be done.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, contrary to what my colleagues from across the aisle have said, Republicans do have commonsense plans for reforming health care. They're different from the Democrat plan for a government takeover of health care, which will be an economic burden that will fall squarely on the backs of small business owners and their workers. At a time when Americans are cutting back and making sacrifices, they expect Washington to do the same. Instead, the Democrats' proposed government-run health care plan imposes $208 billion in new taxes on small businesses who simply cannot afford to pay for their employees' health care. An estimated 5.5 million jobs will be lost at a time when this country already suffers from unemployment not seen in 26 years. The worst thing that Washington can do is introduce a job-killing health care plan that restricts the growth of small businesses during these tough economic times. The American people deserve better, and Republicans have proposed better ways.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 788, had I been present, I would have voted ``nay.''

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, this week the U.N. Human Rights Council is considering a highly biased and one-sided report on Israel's defense against the attacks of Hamas this past January. The council, which has been frequently discredited by its coddling of real human rights violators, is back to its favorite pastime, condemning the nation of Israel for defending itself against the attacks of violent terrorist groups like Hamas. Its latest faux crusade will only serve to further undermine any scrap of legitimacy that the body may have left. If the council votes to condemn Israel and accuse it of war crimes, it's committing a great injustice and allowing itself to serve as a mouthpiece for those who wish to sabotage a true and lasting peace in Israel. This report is not about human rights abuses. It's about taking biased cheap shots at the nation of Israel and undermining its right as a sovereign nation to defend itself against attacks. The U.S. must continue to stand by Israel, a strong democratic ally in the Middle East.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, it is with great sadness that I rise to remember the life and service of Sergeant Mickey Hutchens, a Winston- Salem police officer who passed away on Monday surrounded by friends and family at Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center. Sergeant Hutchens is a North Carolina hero. He gave his life protecting the public from a dangerous criminal. Sergeant Hutchens was shot last week while pursuing an armed criminal in Winston-Salem. With his passing, the Winston-Salem community grieves the loss of one of its finest. He faithfully served on the police force for 27 years, putting his life on the line each day that he showed up for work. We owe him and his family a deep debt of gratitude for the ultimate sacrifice that Sergeant Hutchens made for the public safety. Police officers and public safety workers like him are the key to safe communities that are often taken for granted. Great tragedies, like Sergeant Hutchens' death, serve to remind us of the heroic work done each day by officers like him. Sergeant Hutchens was more than just a faithful public servant. He was well-known as a man of impeccable character who was committed to maintaining his integrity at all costs. He was just the type of person you would want wearing the uniform of a police officer. He lived a life dedicated not to just keeping his community safe, but also to his family and his church. He was a loving and dedicated father of two daughters, Jill and Leah, and a faithful, loving husband to his wife Beth. He was often found serving in his role as a deacon at Forbush Baptist Church. Sergeant Hutchens left a noble legacy in his community. He lived to serve and protect others. His life is a true inspiration, and I pray that his death reminds us of the bravery and sacrifice of those keeping our streets safe each day. Today, his family, friends and colleagues are in my thoughts and prayers as they mourn the loss of a husband, father, brother, friend, fellow officer and a North Carolina hero. May they know God's comfort during this difficult time.