Virginia Foxx

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, I appreciate this and I appreciate the minority leader asking me to lead this hour tonight. I am going to have next to me here a little poster that I'm going to keep up during my talk. I am joined by a couple of my colleagues that I will recognize in just a few minutes. I have been blessed to be a part of an organization and a group that has come here on the House floor in the last 18 months or so called the Truth Squad, led very ably by our colleague, Dr. Price from Georgia. I think that we will add to our Truth Squad on a regular basis the group that will be talking about the House Democrats' Top 100 Broken Promises. Last fall, the Democrats won a majority in this Congress, in the House and in the Senate, by making many promises to the American people. They have not kept these promises. At the beginning of the 110th Congress, the new majority came to power full of promises for a bipartisan working relationship and a landmark pledge to create ``the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history.'' Unfortunately, the first 6 months of Democratic control have been marked by a long string of broken promises. Contrary to the pledges they made to the American people, the leaders of the current majority have delivered a more closed, intellectually dishonest, and ethically ambivalent House of Representatives. By decree instead of open debate, Democrats have attempted to weaken our national defense and legislate retreat from the global war on terror, impose the largest tax increase in American history, propose the most indiscriminate wasteful spending this Congress has seen in decades, craft multi-billion dollar slush funds for secret earmarks, make gas prices worse by raising taxes and increasing regulation, and cut Medicare at a time when our seniors are enjoying large savings in their prescription drug medicines. This is the wrong direction for the American people. I am quoting from a new report that the offices of the Republican leaders have put together and will continue to do that throughout my comments tonight. At the 6-month mark of the new majority, the report takes a look at the House Democrats' top 100 promises and how those broken promises have led to little if any accomplishments of note and a record of failure that has undermined the confidence of the American people in this Congress. As I said earlier, this report complements efforts that have been made by other House Republicans, including the Official Truth Squad, and the Truth Squad has been holding Democrats accountable for their promises. We're going to go over these promises one by one, point them out to the American people and show them what has not happened even though the Democrats made these promises in order to get elected last fall. Let me start with Democratic Promise No. 1: Prepared to Govern and Ready to Lead: ``Democrats are prepared to govern and ready to lead.'' Speaker-Elect Nancy Pelosi, D-CA, in a press release, November 8, 2006. Now, let me tell you what the report is on that promise from the Chicago Tribune. The headline on the article, ``Democrats Promised Way More Than They've Delivered So Far.'' June 21, 2007. And this is the quote from that article: ``Six months after taking over Congress, Democrats find they have accomplished little of their agenda. Perhaps not coincidentally, Congress's job approval rating has reached a dramatic low. If they can't reverse the trend, some Democrats are starting to worry their majority could be short-lived.'' Well, for the benefit of the American people who counted on the promises that the Democrats made and who promised a new bipartisan approach to governing, and with our assistance we could have accomplished a great deal in this 6 months, but because they have refused to uphold their promises, they have not been able to fulfill much, if anything. I would now like to recognize one of my colleagues who's here with us tonight who's going to expand upon some of these promises and talk a little bit about how they have affected the American people and perhaps particularly those in her district, the gentlelady from Florida, Ms. Ginny Brown-Waite.

Ms. FOXX. I thank my colleague from Florida, who also represents a fifth district, as I represent the Fifth District in North Carolina. We share our names together and the districts that we represent, and our respective States together. I am going to speak a little bit more from this report, and then I am going to recognize one of my colleagues from Texas. I think it's important to sort of set the stage again for these comments. I am very grateful to my two colleagues for being with me tonight. Democratic Promise No. 2, now, as my colleague from Florida said, there are a lot more than 100 of these promises. We have taken the Top 100. Between now and the next 6 months, we know there are going to be a lot more than that, but we only have time to deal with the first 100. But this was Democratic Promise No. 2 that I want to highlight, ``We will make this the most honest, ethical and open Congress in history,'' Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi, press conference, November 8, 2006. Broken promises, this is a quote from the Cleveland Plain Dealer editorial, June 10, 2007, entitled, ``A Wake-Up Call for Congress. When Democrats recaptured the House last November after 12 years of the minority, they promised voters `the most honest, the most open and most ethical Congress.' Five months after Nancy Pelosi and her leadership took control, that promise remains unfulfilled.'' With so little in the way of accomplishments, is it any wonder that a new poll released by Gallup last week showed that just 14 percent of Americans have confidence in this Congress, an all-time low. The previous low point for Congress was 18 percent at several points in the time period from 1991 to 1994, the last time Democrats were in power. Indeed, one of the only meaningful accomplishments of this Congress to date has been legislation enacted to fully fund American troops fighting the war on terror, a bill that was carried on the strength of a unified Republican Party. Nearly half of the 39 bills signed into law either named Federal property or billed a road. In sharp contrast, Republicans have spoken with one voice and kept our promise made to the American people 6 months ago to return to our core principles and focus on a smaller, less costly, accountable government. Moreover, a unified Republican Conference has proven formidable, effective and successful in exposing flaws and strengthening Democratic legislation by passing 14 GOP motions to recommit in just 6 months, more than House Democrats were able to accomplish in their 12-year stint in the minority. In many ways, the new Democratic majority has simply picked up where the old Democratic majority left off, a long list of broken promises, little in the way of accomplishments, and dangerously disconnected from the American people. I came to Congress because I wanted to make changes in a positive way and represent the people of my district and the country in a very, very positive way. I think most Members came here for that. It troubles me to see an approval rating of only 14 percent. That is not good for this institution; it is not good for this country. I want us to be able to revive the attitude of the American people toward the Congress. That is why we are holding up these promises that the Democrats have made and not fulfilled that let people know the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans in this body. I would now like to recognize my good colleague from the State of Texas (Mr. Carter), who is going to share some more insights into these broken promises.

Ms. FOXX. I thank the gentleman from Texas for coming over and helping shed some light on this subject. As he has pointed out, and our colleague from Florida pointed out, a lot of things have been said, not just in the heat of a campaign, but in very deliberate opportunities, either on the floor of the House or in plans that were drawn up, in press releases. These were not slips of the tongue that were made. And let me point out to anyone who might have just joined us that, in addition to having the Official Truth Squad which has been operating for about 18 months here in the House to correct misstatements that are made by the people on the other side of the aisle so often, a group of us are going to be highlighting this new report which has just come out today, House Democrats Top 100 Broken Promises, put together by the Republican leaders offices here in the House of Representatives. We think it's important to highlight what was promised to the American people last year, this year and what have been the results of those. In fact, while my colleague from Texas was speaking, I was just thinking about the fact that most of our colleagues have left the Chamber tonight, they're on their way home for the 4th of July recess. And I can remember, it has been just a short time ago, that the Democrats promised that they would get all the appropriations bills passed by the 4th of July recess. I'm not sure that that broken promise is even in here. But as of today, we passed 6 out of 12. So half of the appropriations bills got passed. Now, I've even had some of them accuse us of being the problem in not being able to get the bills passed or not being able to go home on Friday afternoon. And I looked at one of my colleagues one day who said that, and I said, wait a minute; who's in charge here? You all blamed us last year for things we didn't accomplish. Now you're blaming us for things you don't accomplish. I find it very interesting that they're very good at doing that. So our goal here is to simply hold them accountable. I think the American people want their government held accountable for what we promise to do. And as I said earlier, I'm very troubled by having come to a House that I revere so much, this House of Representatives, and find that the American people have such a low opinion of us, based partly, I think, on this very situation that we're faced with, promises made, promises broken. I know when I was a child, and I know with my daughter and with my grandchildren, they take promises very, very seriously. And I think the American people take promises very, very seriously. And I know that Republicans did not always live up to their reputation of being fiscal conservatives in the last 4 years, I would say, that they were in control of this House. But I don't think anybody can accuse us of having broken promises the way the Democrats have broken promises. I, like most of my colleagues, want to work with the Democrats on getting things accomplished for the American people. But we find that difficult to do when we know that we can't count on their word. I want to bring up a few more of these promises that have been made and broken that I think are going to be very, very good for the American people to be reminded of. I'm going to go in this report that's highlighted here to Democratic Promise No. 16, lower gasoline prices. I know this is a big concern in my district. It's a big concern to me. Promise: ``Democrats have a plan to lower gas prices. Join Democrats who are working to lower gas prices now.'' That was said by then minority leader Nancy Pelosi, Democrat, California in a press release, April 19, 2006. Broken promise: And I'm going to quote from USA Today, May 22, 2007. ``The average price of gasoline hit $3.218 a gallon, up a stunning 11.5 cents the past week, and just half a penny shy of the inflation adjusted record the government reported. The average is almost certain this week to pass the inflation adjusted high of 3.223 recorded in May 1981 by the Energy Information Administration.'' And that comes from an article entitled Average Gasoline Price Nears 1981 Average. And as I said, it's from USA Today, May 22, 2007. Democrats have been in power for 6 months and gas prices have gone up, not down. Democratic Promise No. 17: Make energy reform a top priority. Promise: ``Democrats promise to hit the ground running on energy issues if they win control of the House or Senate. Responding to voters concerns about $3 a gallon gasoline and the soaring cost of home heating oil, Democratic leaders in both Chambers have ranked energy as one of their top priorities for the next Congress.'' That's from an article entitled Energy Reserving a Front Burner, National Journal, September 9, 2006. Broken promise: And this is a quote from Energy and Environment Daily, May 18, 2007. ``House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Democrat, California, issued a clear directive soon after Democrats took control of Congress this year, promising a comprehensive energy and climate change bill on the House floor by the 4th of July. But with five legislative work weeks to go before that deadline, House Democrats are still left with the task of cobbling together a bill from as many as 11 committees. As for the deadline itself, a House Democratic aide close to the process said the package will not arrive on the House floor before the July 4th recess.'' Well, that aide was certainly correct. We just adjourned today for the 4th of July recess, and we certainly did not have an energy bill to vote on. And 6 months after the Democrats took power in Congress, no comprehensive energy reform has ever been passed by the House, much less sent to the Senate. Democratic Promise No. 18: Make global warming a top priority. Promise: Again from Speaker Nancy Pelosi. ``The most urgent environmental issue facing us today is global warming.'' And this comes from a piece attributed to the Speaker, a New Direction for America, page 9. Broken promise: June 1, 2007, Congress Daily PM. ``Pelosi says global warming bill might wait until next year. Doesn't sound like it's a very urgent issue if they're going to put it off for a year.'' And the promises and the broken promises related to energy continue to go on and on and on.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me. I haven't been on the floor to hear much of the debate on this bill, but a couple of things have caught my attention. One is that the chairman said we don't want across-the-board cuts. Well, as I understand, they don't want cuts to individual programs or specific programs either, so I guess that means we don't want cuts, period. I remember hearing the debate on this floor about raising the minimum wage, and that has resonated in my memory in relationship to the debate on not making any cuts for this bill also. There were raving comments made about how people who were living on the minimum wage hadn't received an increase for years and years and years, and yet Members of Congress had received pay raises. Well, it seems to me that if we're concerned about people who are getting minimum wage, we definitely should be concerned about increasing spending for this bill or any other government program, for that matter. We are raising spending by billions of dollars, and where is that money coming from? That money is coming from the very people that were supposed to be helping those people making the minimum wage. In just 6 months, the new Democrat majority has passed or paved the way for $103.4 billion in increased spending. Now, what that means is, again, that we are taking that money away from the American citizens. By doing that, they have raised the national debt limit by $850 billion, which they said they would never do, or $2,812 for every single man, woman and child alive in the United States today, the second largest increase in the national debt in American history, and the largest single tax increase in American history they have passed. So we don't need to be doing this. We need to be helping average working Americans, by letting them keep more of the money. The government doesn't know how to spend your money better than you know how to spend it.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of America's local libraries. Libraries have long been the locus of learning, cultural exchange and imagination for young and old alike. As a former librarian, I know that libraries play a crucial role in providing generation after generation with access to great books and world-changing ideas. Libraries serve our communities as a sort of guidepost along an often overwhelming path of information in the Internet age. Librarians still provide the invaluable service of helping us answer the toughest questions and directing us to the most reliable sources for research. For many Americans, libraries are the only place they have ready access to thousands of books on almost any topic. By their very nature, libraries encourage us to branch out and pursue interests that we might not be naturally inclined to pursue. The phenomenon that best describes libraries, contribution to local communities is a patron wandering through the stacks and simply selecting a book because it caught his or her eye. It's this ability to ignite our imaginations and spur us to learn that makes libraries a lynchpin for thousands of communities across the Nation.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, almost 6 months into the new Congress with a new majority, the ``drain the swamp'' mentality is disappearing as quickly as the Democrats' approval ratings in Congress. A new Gallup Poll has the latest congressional approval rating at 14 percent, which is the lowest it's been since the Democrats took charge and the lowest of all time. This makes sense when you consider that the Democrat leadership continues to backpedal at every opportunity on the promises they made to the American people, whether it's a failure to enact openness and transparency to increase accountability for earmark reform, their failure to enact their 100-hour agenda, or the increased infighting that's being seen on the other side as it tries to cope with how to spin another broken promise to their constituents. Enough is enough, and it's time to get down to the important business the American people elected us to do.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, the amendment I am offering would restore the funding level for international organizations provided in this bill to the fiscal year 2007 level. The purpose of my amendment is twofold. First, it would help bring accountability to organizations that have demonstrated limited effectiveness. Second, this amendment would help control the out-of- control Federal deficit. This keeps the funding level at last year's level, which was very reasonable. In fiscal year 2006, total interest payments on Treasury debt securities amounted to $405.9 billion, or about 14 percent of Federal outlays. That amounts to 1.7 percent of the U.S. GDP. Translated, that means 1.7 cents of every dollar produced by Americans is used to pay interest on the Federal debt. As a percentage of GDP, the Federal debt ratio is larger for the United States than it is in Finland, Ireland, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. By any measure, it should be clear to any responsible fiscal steward that Congress needs to do more to control deficit spending to help reduce the Federal debt. My amendment would take a small but much-needed step in that direction. With a little help from the majority party in Congress, we could reduce unnecessary spending and return more money to the American people who earned it in the first place. Second, I wonder what our constituents would think if they knew they were being forced to pay millions for perpetual, never-ending funding increases for organizations such as the International Bureau for Weights and Measures, the International Coffee Association, the International Copper Study Group, the International Hydrographic Organization, the International Lead and Zinc Study Group, the International Rubber Study Group, and the World Organization for Animal Health. Given the tremendous amount of funding contained in the bill for the United Nations, I am particularly interested in encouraging that body to reexamine its spending habits so it can be more effective at fulfilling its mission. As most would agree, the purpose of the United Nations is to help promote peace and security throughout the world. However, it has obviously failed miserably in that respect. Iran's nuclear weapons program is still chugging along at a rapid pace, threatening Israel and the entire region. Genocide persists in Sudan. All of the minds at the United Nations can't even agree on a definition for the word ``terrorism'' in an age where terrorism remains one of the biggest threats to humanity and civilization. Furthermore, despite the implicit purpose of the United Nations Human Rights Council to promote global human rights, this body has among its membership notorious human rights abusers such as Angola, China, Cuba, Egypt, Russia and Saudi Arabia. Iran serves as the Vice Chair of the U.N. Disarmament Commission, Syria is the Rapporteur of the U.N. Disarmament Commission, Zimbabwe is the Chair of the U.N. Commission on Sustainable Development, and Sudan serves on the Executive Committee of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees. And if that wasn't enough, an examination of a ranked list of countries subject to the most U.N. condemnation for human rights violations in 2006 reveals Israel ranking first, having received 135 actions, nearly twice as many as Sudan, the next country listed, and more than the number of actions directed at Iran, China, Colombia, Cuba, Saudi Arabia and Syria combined. The United States ranks fourth on this list, having been subject to 38 actions. This indicates that the United Nations is more interested in condemning Israel and the United States than it is in horrendous human rights abusers throughout the world. With that being said, the part of my amendment that should draw support from both sides of the aisle is the fact that my amendment doesn't cut a dollar from U.S. spending on international organizations. My amendment simply maintains the fiscal year 2007 level. By holding the line on spending, Congress can have another year to work on balancing the books and finding other ways to fund the increased spending proposals contained in the underlying bill. Mr. Chairman, at a time when Americans are being asked to do more with their budgets, it is only reasonable to expect the same out of those who benefit from generous American donations. That is why it should be clear to all of my colleagues why they should support my amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. FOXX. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate what my colleague has said. But these organizations do nothing to help the security of the United States. The U.N. is an ineffective and corrupt organization and our continuing to provide much of its funding implicitly endorses that corruption and ineffectiveness. If we put this to a vote of the American people, they would say, fund nothing of the United Nations. Keeping this at level funding is the right thing to do. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Smith-Stupak amendment that guards against policies that would lead to taxpayer funding of abortions abroad. This amendment would ensure that the Mexico City Policy is included in this spending bill. The Mexico City Policy, first enacted by President Reagan in 1984 and reinstated in 2001, ensures that organizations that do international population assistance work and that promote abortion as a method of family planning do not receive United States funding. This is a critical policy that underscores the sanctity of human life by telling groups that if they want to promote abortion, they better find a source of funding other than the U.S. taxpayer. It is quite simple: If a group demonstrates a disregard for human life, they don't get funding. Let me be clear, the Mexico City policy and this funding do not reduce funding for family planning programs. The focus instead is on channeling funds to organizations that agree not to promote abortion. There is, therefore, no overall reduction of family planning funds. Again, the guidelines are simple. If you promote abortion, the U.S. Government will not be giving you money. Under the current language in the State-Foreign Operations appropriation bill, funding would once again flow to groups that promote abortion. The Smith-Stupak amendment would eliminate language that allows funding to go to even the most aggressively pro-abortion groups. This amendment is about our Nation's abortion policy. As such, it is entirely focused on ensuring our government does not fund groups that promote abortion. I support this amendment because it wisely guards against any erosion of our protection of the sanctity of human life.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to celebrate the 50th anniversary of Tweetsie Railroad, a western North Carolina fixture that has been providing fun and excitement to families for the past five decades. Tweetsie Railroad, founded in 1957, was North Carolina's first-ever amusement park. Nestled in the mountains of Blowing Rock, North Carolina, it is home to the classic steam locomotive Tweetsie 12. Tweetsie's historic lineage runs deep. This steam engine is the last remaining locomotive that ran a rail line connecting Boone, North Carolina, to Johnson City, Tennessee, through the rugged Appalachians. The Wild West theme of the park permeates every aspect of the family entertainment that draws families from all over. Tweetsie Railroad is in a category of its own, situated in a beautiful mountain setting. Away from the noise and rush of everyday life, this North Carolina fixture offers an escape from the worries of today with a glimpse of a bygone era. This retreat of family entertainment is part of a great American tradition, and I wish it many more years of delighting families with wholesome fun.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in recognition of the centennial of the town of Ronda, North Carolina. This week, Ronda celebrates the 100th anniversary of its 1907 incorporation. Ronda, a thriving community in Wilkes County, North Carolina, is home to a rich heritage of hardworking families, and I am very proud to represent them. The town traces its roots all the way back to 1779, when the surrounding area was deeded to Benjamin Cleveland in what would become the eastern part of Wilkes County. Cleveland established a farming operation which became known as Roundabout Farm, named for the way the Yadkin River cut through the land around the farm. As these things usually turn out, the term Roundabout was shortened and the name Ronda was born. Manufacturing operations and agriculture have played a large role in the town's 100-year history, making Ronda one of the economic epicenters of Wilkes County during the past century. While the town of Ronda has certainly seen its share of economic storms, it remains a strong and united American community today. I wish to honor this fine North Carolina community for its steadfast commitment to the small town values that help make this Nation great. Happy centennial, Ronda. Here's to 100 more years of small town living.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, during the first months of this new Congress, Democrats have passed resolutions congratulating sports teams and renaming post offices, along with the largest tax increase in American history. But they've done nothing to lower the tax burden on hardworking American families, enact legislation to address skyrocketing gasoline prices, or enact legislation to secure our borders. I know what my district needs. Families in my district want a lower tax bill. They want us to spend their tax dollars sparingly and wisely. My constituents want to pay less for gas at the pump. They want to know our borders are secure, and that our ports and airports are safe from terrorists. It's time for this Congress to start addressing the priorities of the American public. It's time we stopped passing resolutions congratulating sports teams and started enacting legislation into law. I urge my Democrat colleagues not to continue to languish as a do- nothing Congress, but to let us start enacting some of the legislative priorities of our constituents into law.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, my amendment would reduce funding for the Department of Energy Departmental Administration to the fiscal year 2007 level. This amendment would save $28 million, reducing the account from $304.782 million to $276.832 million, the fiscal year 2007 enacted level. The Energy and Water appropriations bill is already $1.1 billion over the President's request. This amendment would reduce the funding in the Departmental Administration account, putting it at last year's enacted level. The bill provides a 10 percent increase for DOE's Departmental Administration account. There has been at least $105.5 billion in new Federal spending over the next 5 years authorized by the House Democratic leadership this year. In enacting the largest tax increase in American history, the Democrats' budget allows for $28 billion in spending over that of the President's budget request. This amendment is designed to save the taxpayers almost $30 million, just a small dent in the unnecessary increases in Federal spending this year, which is being fueled by huge tax increases. We've constantly heard on the floor, around this bill especially, the problem of increased rules and regulations. What happens when you have additional administrators? What you are going to get are more rules and more regulations. We are constantly adding administrative costs to all of the Federal Government. I think we can make a very small dent, but an important dent, in our deficit spending by cutting these funds. This should not hurt at all the administration of the Department and the administration of programs. If we were going to put in additional funding anywhere, we ought to put that money in for direct services and not for administration. We hear more and more about too much administration in the education field, but I think we have it all over the Federal Government, State governments, local governments. We are talking about deficits, not surpluses. If we had a huge surplus in this country, we might be wanting to talk about spending additional money. But we don't need to be doing that. This will benefit the taxpayers all over this country. And what we need to do is to cut spending, not increase spending. That is what we heard all last year from the majority party. I am surprised that we aren't continuing to hear it this year. When they are in charge, they want to spend lots of money. So, Mr. Chairman, I respectfully ask my colleagues to support this, which would save $28 million and make a small dent in our deficit. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to salute Jerry Baker, America's master gardener, as he celebrates his birthday. As a former owner of a nursery business, I've come to appreciate the wit and wisdom that Jerry has given to gardeners across the country for more than three decades. Jerry has been offering tips for almost as long as I can remember. His folksy and down-to-earth advice has been helping everyone from city dwellers trying to master a finicky herb garden in a window box to longtime gardeners across rural America who produce those ubiquitous wheelbarrows full of zucchini. Thanks to Jerry, our gardens have been producing more with less. Today, with dozens of books full of garden advice in print and a weekly nationwide radio show where he solves the gardening problems of people across the country, Jerry is well-established as America's go-to guy on all things gardening. As he marks one more year on his calendar, I rise to wish him many more years of garden mastering. Happy birthday, Jerry.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. Mr. Chairman, I also rise to support the amendment of my colleague from Georgia, Mr. Westmoreland. I want to reiterate some of the comments that have already been made. We simply have to start exercising fiscal discipline in this House. I often talk about how the Republicans missed the mark by overspending in the last few years and I talk about they, not we, because I came here as a fiscal conservative. I am even more of a fiscal conservative than I was when I first came to Congress, and I think most Members of my party have gotten up and admitted that we have spent too much money in the last few years. But most people now have seen the error of our ways, and we know that we have to start cutting, and we need to start right here. We talked about this last week, but we need to continue to talk about it. We are on track for pretty soon 70 cents out of every dollar of Federal money going in to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, in the very, very near future. We do not need to take our country in that direction. We have got to start trimming budgets, and this is the place to start now. If we do not do that, we are not only going to see a repeat of what the Democrats are bringing to us, the biggest tax increase in American history this year, we are going to continue to see that to the point where we are going to be taxing most of the money that Americans make, and we are going to destroy this country with that kind of an attitude. Our economy is doing great because of the tax cuts that were instituted in 2001 and 2003, and the only way we can maintain that type of economy is for us to control spending. We don't have a revenue problem in this country. We have a spending problem. We need serious fundamental reform of our spending. We need fiscal discipline. As my colleagues have said, we are dealing with spending at twice the rate of inflation. American families cannot stand that. They do not want us to continue spending at the level that we are spending. It is on track to be the largest spending increase that we have seen in a long, long time in this country. We heard over and over again last year on the floor from the party that is now the majority party, then the minority party, that we were spending too much money. Here they are, expanding what was spent last year, and expanding it at a rate that is simply unsustainable. They obviously did not mean what they said last year when they said we were spending too much money. It is a small cut. Again, I reiterate what my colleagues have said. We have been in Washington too long when we think of $18 million as a small cut. But as Everett Dirksen said many, many years ago, ``A million here and a million there, and pretty soon you are talking about real money.'' That is what we are doing. Let me put Federal spending into some context for the American people. The United States Federal Government is on track to spend more money next year than Germany's entire economy in the year 2005. Germany is and has been the third largest economy in the world for a long, long time. There are only two countries in the world with entire economies that are larger than the U.S. Government budget, the United States itself and Japan. So it is important that we start cutting back, and we have to do it a little bit at a time. If there is anybody in this country who believes that throwing more money at a problem from the Federal Government's level solves problems, then they haven't looked at the statistics on our education system, they haven't looked at the statistics on what has happened with control of disasters. We know that simply throwing money at a problem does not solve the problem. We need accountability, we need efficiency, and we really need to focus on those issues before we spend additional dollars. I think that we do need more oversight of how Federal Government programs are run. But simply throwing more money at the problem won't create that oversight for us. We have to get down in the trenches, examine programs, see how money is being spent, and say what effect did you get from this money you are currently spending. In most cases we can probably cut budgets and come out far ahead.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in remembrance of Ruth Bell Graham, wife and confidante of the Reverend Billy Graham. Ruth Graham died last week at the age of 87, having lived a rich and selfless life of service. She epitomized the faithful wife and mother and was a close spiritual adviser who probably did more than any other human being to make possible the global ministry of Billy Graham. I doubt whether we exaggerate when we say that Billy Graham could not have been the man he is known as today without the unwavering support of his wife. While she may not have claimed much of the spotlight in his life, she raised a family that to this day is having a tremendous impact on the world. Reverend Graham paid her the best tribute. He said that Ruth Graham was ``the most incredible woman I have ever known.'' And when asked to name the finest Christian he had ever met, Billy Graham would always say, ``My wife, Ruth.'' In tribute to her, he said that, ``She was a spiritual giant, whose unparalleled knowledge of the Bible and commitment to prayer were a challenge and inspiration to everyone who knew her. No one else could have borne the load that she carried. She was a vital and integral part of our ministry, and my work through the years would have been impossible without her encouragement and support.'' Despite her declining health in recent years, she always placed her husband and family before herself. She gladly accepted a role in the Graham family that involved offering support, prayer and encouragement. Never one to clamor for the public eye, Ruth nonetheless was a vital part of Billy Graham's ministry. She was a bulwark against the demands of the endless public involvement of Billy Graham's many responsibilities as a worldwide evangelist. Ruth Bell Graham was born in China in 1920 to her medical missionary parents at a Presbyterian Hospital far north of Shanghai. She spent her childhood on the mission field, and sensed a calling to serve God and give her life to spread the gospel. Ruth connected with her eventual home in North Carolina when she completed high school in Montreat, North Carolina, while her parents were home from China on furlough. She would later enroll in Wheaton College where she met her future husband, the fervent evangelist hailing from Charlotte, North Carolina. After no small internal struggle over her desire to become a missionary, Ruth decided to invest her life in the mission of evangelism that so captivated Billy, and they were married in Montreat on August 13, 1943. As Billy Graham's responsibilities as an evangelist continued to grow, Ruth and Billy moved to Montreat near her parents. Here, Ruth would raise a family of five children strong and stand behind the man who was preaching to millions of people across the world. Ruth was a woman who lived the written word and treasured the Bible. She enjoyed assisting her husband as he wrote sermons and was an accomplished author herself. Over the course of her life, she would author or coauthor more than a dozen books. She also did not hesitate to start ministries of her own. Always concerned with reaching out to those in need, whether her local community or the global community, Ruth Graham created the Ruth Bell Graham International Children's Health Fund to help the world's neediest children and helped create the Ruth and Billy Graham Children's Health Center in Asheville. Franklin, their son, founded Samaritan's Purse Ministry which is based in Boone, North Carolina. Ruth enabled and freed her husband to concentrate on his evangelistic calling. When he needed someone to turn to, Billy Graham knew that he could turn to her for counsel, encouragement and an intellect steeped in learning the scripture. Our thoughts and prayers are with the Graham family today as they mourn the passing of a peerless wife, sacrificial mother and faithful friend. May her memories serve to remind us of the profound meaning of a life given in service to God and family.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Madam Speaker, reserving the right to object, I have a very simple question. I think I am a very logical person. I don't understand why we are going to be voting on the water bill and then coming back and voting on the earmarks attached to another bill. That does not seem logical to me.

Ms. FOXX. Thank you. Madam Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I love my colleague from Missouri, appreciate his leading our prayer breakfast during the week; but he is wrong. This is not a delaying tactic. We have been bringing things out into the open with this bill, with our discussions of the Homeland Security bill, and he knows and we know that the bill does not have to be approved until September because it doesn't go into effect until October so we are not delaying any fence building. The discussions we have been having on the floor have been tremendously enlightening, as the Republicans have fought literally through the night to restore openness to our government. My colleagues on the other side of the aisle have raised these complaints that we are distracting from the real issue. The debate on making earmarks public before we vote on the bill is the real issue. I can think of nothing more important than defending the rights of Members of this House to contest potentially wasteful spending requests. But as we have highlighted for the past couple of days, the majority wants to kill that right and instead replace it with a complaints department and massive slush funds. A complaints department is not good enough. My constituents, and every American, deserve to know what will be in this bill before we vote on it and telling us to write a letter to the committee when to contest an egregious earmark once they are announced merely amounts to wallpapering over the core issue here. We need openness. And the more my colleagues in the majority fight to keep earmarks secret, the more Americans will see them as the party of hypocrisy.

Ms. FOXX

Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to make a pledge to the American people. I pledge to fight secrecy in the Federal spending process. It seems that some Democratic lawmakers would like to keep earmarks in spending bills secret until August, months after the House votes on the bills that will contain the requests. By air-dropping these earmarks in at the last minute, my Democratic colleagues are effectively cutting off debate on potentially wasteful or controversial items. Instead of the transparency and accountability they promised, the Democrats' spending bills will essentially include a slush fund for billions of dollars in earmarks hidden from public scrutiny. I honestly can't believe it. These taxpayer-backed slush funds will fund earmarks without actually putting them into the bills before the House votes. This is dangerous turf. Americans don't want more secrecy; they want less. As the Baltimore Sun wrote yesterday, the Democrats' new rules have ``made the process exponentially worse.'' Mr. Speaker, we must restore accountability to the process lest the path to corruption is paved smooth by secrecy and neglect.