Virginia Foxx

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from New York for raising the issue of the plight of dairy farmers in particular. All across my district, we see farmers of all types going out of business, but particularly hard hit are the dairy farmers. And there is no tougher type of farming than dairy farming in this country. My husband and I have done a lot of farming in our lives. We've never had a lot of cows, but we both grew up milking cows. And believe me, that is the toughest work in the world. You've got to be there every day, all day, and these folks are really struggling to stay in business. And the sad part about it is that with the cap-and-tax bill that passed last week and so many of the other policies of this administration and this Congress, we are going headlong into putting a lot of our farmers out of business, particularly the dairy farmers. Again, the implication here is that we ought not to be spending a lot of time talking about the problems that we're facing in this country and that agriculture is facing, that all of our citizens are facing. But the Democrats in charge want to limit what ideas can be debated on the floor and what constituents can be represented in this House. Our constituents in both Republican districts and Democrat districts are struggling to make ends meet, are facing unemployment, and yet are being shut out of participating in a debate over how their hard-earned taxpayer dollars are being borrowed and spent by the Federal Government. It is a mystery as to why the majority is blocking debate on such important legislation. What are they afraid of? Are they protecting their Members from tough votes? Are they afraid of the democratic process? It's hard to know why they're doing it. The Speaker has gone back on her word about making this the most open process in the world. Is she afraid that the American people will disagree with her? Is she keeping other Democrats from having to make tough decisions on difficult votes? Is she afraid of the very principles upon which our country is founded? We are very concerned, again, with the direction in which this Congress is going as far as the rules are concerned. During the Independence Day break, I was at home. I went to a lot of functions. I spoke to my constituents. I spoke to hundreds of them. They told me over and over and over again how concerned they are about the direction this country is going. They used the word ``frightened'' over and over again. I talked to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and they say they are hearing the very same things from their constituents at home. They are concerned about the amount of money that's being spent by this Congress, the policies that this administration is taking, and the direction in which they are moving. We know that the Democrats have proposed spending $1.89 trillion of American taxpayer money for discretionary government programs in the 2010 fiscal year. When all appropriation spending is combined, the Democrats have increased nondefense, nonveteran discretionary spending by 85 percent over the last 2 fiscal years. With millions of jobs lost since the passage of the stimulus, the President said this morning ``there is nothing we would have done differently concerning the $787 billion spending bill.'' But that spending bill, which is really a trillion-dollar spending bill because of the cost of the bill, isn't creating the jobs Democrats promised. Even the Vice President said over the weekend this regarding the bill's poor returns: ``The truth is we and everyone else misread the economy.'' Well, no, not everyone else did that because Republicans all voted against the stimulus bill. You aren't going to hang that around our necks, Mr. Vice President. House Democrats now want to spend another trillion dollars on a government-run health care bill after they have just crammed through a national energy tax. At the same time, House Republicans are being denied the opportunity to offer cost-cutting amendments to save taxpayer money. Many Republican proposals could save billions in wasteful government spending and better prioritize how Washington spends taxpayer funds. But these ideas are being shut down. This is not the way to operate the greatest deliberative body in the world. I am going again to suggest to my colleagues that they vote ``no'' on this rule because this is not the way we should be going. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, the majority party, because they bring bills to the floor, amendments to the floor at 3 a.m. and Members have no time to read the bills, have effectively taken away the opportunity to read bills before we vote on them. And now to suggest that it's a waste of time to debate the bill is really taking this, I think, to an extreme. So I certainly hope that that idea doesn't catch on along with the idea of not letting people read the bills before they vote on them. Mr. Speaker, I would now like to yield 2 minutes to my colleague from New York (Mr. Lee).

Ms. FOXX. I yield the gentleman 1 minute.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I now would like to yield 4 minutes to our colleague from Georgia (Mr. Kingston).

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I would now like to yield 2 minutes to our colleague from Texas (Mr. Brady).

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to our colleague from Indiana (Mr. Burton). (Mr. BURTON of Indiana asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I now yield 2 minutes to my colleague from Texas (Mr. Conaway).

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I now yield such time as he may consume to the distinguished ranking member of the Rules Committee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier). (Mr. DREIER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Massachusetts for yielding me this time. While we often disagree on issues, it is clear that he is passionate about this issue. Mr. Speaker, I come before you today deeply concerned about the closed rule we have before us. Throughout this appropriations season, the Democrat majority has taken unprecedented steps to silence both the minority and their own Democrat colleagues by offering all appropriations bills under closed rules. This has consistently eliminated the ability of Members to speak up for how their constituents believe their money should be spent. But today marks a record in modern history. Today, the Democrat majority has gone even further by surpassing the number of restrictive rules ever offered during appropriations season in the House of Representatives. Mr. Speaker, when Republicans were in the majority, the most regular appropriations bills considered under a restrictive rule in any single season was four in 1997 which was before my colleague, Mr. Dreier, was the chairman. Today, with the addition of this rule, the Democrat majority has exceeded that modern record. After promising the American people during campaign season that this would be the most open and honest Congress in history, Speaker Pelosi has gone back on her word in the name of appropriations season by making this the most closed and restrictive Congress in history. Instead of having their ideas heard, the American people are being silenced with Speaker Pelosi's justification that, We won the election, so we decide. As my colleagues have expressed during the past four appropriations debates this season, bringing appropriations bills to the floor under a closed rule is unprecedented. It does an injustice to both Republicans and Democrats who want to have the opportunity to offer amendments and participate in debate with their colleagues over pressing issues of our time. By choosing to operate in this way, the majority has cut off the minority and their own colleagues from having any input in the legislative process. Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on this rule. I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX

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

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, we have had, I think, a very good debate on this rule. We have explained why the rule should not be approved. Very, very good amendments which were offered to this rule were not accepted. Amendments to the bill were not accepted, and we should be dealing with those amendments. We want to make sure that the money that is going to help small businesses in this country is being used as wisely as it can be. We know right now that the American people are hurting and continuing to lose jobs. The impact of the policies of this administration and the Democratically controlled Congress have been devastating, not only to large but also to small businesses. The Obama administration and congressional Democrats promised us earlier this year that their trillion-dollar stimulus would create jobs immediately and unemployment would not rise above 8 percent. In June alone, almost half a million jobs were lost, driving unemployment to 9.5 percent, it's highest level in almost 3 decades. It's clear that the Democrats' trillion-dollar stimulus bill isn't working. Every American has the right to ask where are the jobs that were promised by them. Every American has to ask on every piece of policy that we pass here, how is it going to impact jobs? How is it going to impact me as an American? Small businesses particularly have a concern about this. We have been spending hours and hours and hours doing things like honoring sports teams and athletes for their achievements. We have honored people retiring from their jobs, universities on various anniversaries and other items that are not critical to the operations of our government. We want to acknowledge the achievements of all of these people and all of these groups, but what we should be doing is spending time talking about what we need to be doing to bring back this economy. But the Democrats constantly say they have the schedule, they have to adhere to it, and as a result of it, they have to limit the amendments that can be offered on the floor to these important bills. Those are not very good excuses while the American people, I think, are hurting. They, again, have the right to ask where are the jobs that were promised, what is happening to this economy? The American people also know we cannot tax and spend and bail our way back to a growing economy. The Democrats in this body are on the side of more government and more taxes. Small businesses, not government, are the engine of our economy. House Republicans are on the side of the American people, and what we want to do is focus on small businesses to help put America back to work. We know that the health care bill that's going to come forward, we believe, later this week or next week, will have lots of tax increases in it that are going to finance their health, quote, reform proposal. However, what it's going to do is have a negative impact on small businesses. As I mentioned earlier, the cap-and-tax bill, which passed here 10 days ago, will eliminate between 1 million and 7 million jobs in this country if it is enacted. So while there is this small sop to small businesses and to the American people in the form of this bill, I am going to urge my colleagues to vote ``no'' on the rule for H.R. 2965, Enhancing Small Business Research and Innovation Act, because we can be doing better for the American people and particularly better for small businesses. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I would now like to yield 3 minutes to our distinguished colleague from Michigan (Mr. Ehlers).

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, we are not talking about taxes being in this bill. Many, as I have said, support this legislation. However, we do know that this is a drop in the bucket compared to the jobs that the Democrats are killing in this country right now, and I'm going to talk a little more about that later. But just the bill that passed just before we went home for the Independence Day break, the cap-and-tax bill, we know is going to eliminate between 1 and 7 million jobs in this country if it is enacted. So many, many more jobs are being killed by this Congress than are being created by this small bill. I would now like to yield 2 minutes to our colleague from New York (Mr. Lee)

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I find it interesting that my colleague from Colorado would be praising a budget that was passed earlier this year that has the seeds of the largest tax increase in the history of this country and will impact all small businesses adversely. I now would like to yield 3 minutes to my colleague from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).

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

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that this program has resulted in many good things happening in our country. We are now going to be spending this year $260.5 million on this program; however, I think that we need to call attention to the many ways that the Democrats are harming small businesses in our country. This is a small program, but what they are going to be doing, in terms of what we have understood from the Democrat health plan that is going to be introduced later this week, from press reports, is they are going to partially pay for it by imposing a surtax on individuals with incomes in excess of $250,000 a year. But because most small businesses do not pay corporate income taxes and, instead, pay taxes on small business income on their individual returns, small businesses are going to be particularly hard hit by this tax increase. While precise data is not currently available on the Democrat proposal, data is available on many small businesses that pay taxes at the top rate. I want to talk a little bit about that. We have the results of a survey that the National Federation of Independent Business has done. It shows that out of all small businesses, 6.4 percent of those with one to nine employees, 21 percent of those with 10 to 19 employees, and 40 percent of those with 20 to 249 employees would be impacted by a tax increase on incomes above $250,000. So while the Democrats are giving to a small group of small businesses in this country through this program, they are going to be hurting many, many more small businesses. And this, I think, in some ways is a sop to our small business community when what Republicans want to do is help all of our small businesses, and we can do that by keeping our taxes lower instead of raising them on them. I would now like to yield 2 minutes to my colleague from Iowa (Mr. King).

Ms. FOXX. I yield an additional 1 minute.

Ms. FOXX. I yield the gentleman from Illinois 1 additional minute.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Manzullo).

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Arizona (Mr. Flake).

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, pursuant to clause 1, rule I, I demand a vote on agreeing to the Speaker's approval of the Journal.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, Democrats in Washington are pushing hard for a government takeover of health care. The result will be devastating for patients across the country. In countries that already have government-run health care, like Britain and Canada, bureaucrats are put in charge of intimate health care decisions and critical care is denied. Look at the story of one woman from Great Britain, Sarah Anderson. Her father suffers from a kidney tumor that could be treated by a drug approved throughout most of Europe. But, sadly, Britain's National Health Service is denying Sarah's father this lifesaving treatment. This case is not unique as patients across Great Britain are denied the care they need by the government's health care service. In much of Canada, patients are even banned from paying for private health care. The Democrats' health care reform would be a bad prescription for the American people. Republicans have a better health care reform that provides high- quality health care coverage to every American and that doesn't put bureaucrats between patients and the care they need.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Ms FOXX

Ms FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.